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

MurphysParadox's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Society Member. 1,067 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 1,067 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Mrs. H. - When's the next session? Let us know what you guys do and how well it goes!

Yeah, you can't tumble through squares in the heavier armors.

You could ask the Armored Pirate ability at level 7 and 11 to say that medium (and then heavy) armor is treated like light armor for swim and acrobatics checks. This would let you get the no ACP and still be able to tumble around the field. It isn't really that broken a thing since tumbling is so rarely exercised in combat.

The upper section mentions condition names but has no rules in the sentence, so they aren't being used as official key words. Since the section further down uses key words and rules for what requirements are necessary to gain them, that sentence is the actual rules one.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Technically, it appears to be allowable. Unfortunately, you're taking at least three levels of alchemist and two feats to do this. Assuming Alchemist 3/Fighter 1, your BAB is +3 and the two-weapon penalty is -4 on every attack. Even if you have an 20 strength and weapon focus, you'd be swinging at half your normal to-hit bonus.

While thematically interesting, it is numerically pretty crappy.

Basically, you can approach this two ways. Either you double the final gold amount (274gp or so) OR each roll only takes 4 hours, so you get two batches in one day. If you're just taking 10 each time and making all the same stuff, the difference is minimal in amount completed, but if you roll then it can be better (or worse, of course), but if you want to make two batches of different things, then it can be good.

Alternatively, you only use half the day to do the 5 fires and instead can do something else with the rest of your day.

Your math feels right, but I've not delved into that particular mess in quite some time. Seems accurate.

You should be able to do more than one item a day, especially with Swift Alchemy, but again I'm not too familiar with any odd nuances or combinations of restrictions.

You're overthinking the first bolded section. Those are fluff words in the fluff description. The only part that actually matters is the sentence talking about consequences of failed saves.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

At any given moment of time, the creature may or may not be there. The word 'random' in the spell descriptions means you cannot plan for it. The 50% for every 5 feet of movement means it happens often (normal mediums creatures move 5 feet in half a second).

It isn't like aiming to attack someone coming through the door, because that is a directional state change. The target goes from one side to the other side of the door with a single discrete step. The target isn't jumping randomly between one side and the other of the door.

In this case, the target is literally moving from material to ethereal at random. Between the time it appears and the time your sword reaches it, there's a 50% chance it is ethereal. Same if you ready an action to attack as soon as it goes ethereal, you've got a 50% chance that it'll have popped right back to material by the time the weapon hits.

It is meant to be random to be unpredictable. If it was predictable, then a creature with blink could say "I ready an action to step through this wall as soon as I become ethereal, thus avoiding the 50% chance of becoming solid when I'm stepping 5 feet".

Also, when does the ability trigger? One assumes it happens immediately after you declare it. If the transition can happen between a 5 foot step and the next, then your readied action would happen within a second. Your initiative wouldn't change; at most you act on the next initiative count.

Other than full attack actions, when wouldn't someone fighting a blinking creature just ready their attack to completely negate the blink effect with no consequences to initiative or chance to miss?

I'd say full round actions continue to prevent any additional actions.

Full-round action is a distinct type of action, neither standard or move. Amazing Initiative says you get an additional standard action. If you take a full round action, you never take a standard and thus you can't have an additional one.

The other interpretation is simply to follow the description of full-round action, specifically this part - "it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action".

Edit - Furthermore, it makes sense thematically. Amazing Initiative's primary bonus is an increased initiative, which correlates to acting sooner in a fight. So the idea is to act first, move, attack, spend a mythic point, attack a second time. Cast spell, move, attack (basically like using a Quickened version of the spell when you cast with your normal standard then use the mythic power to get a second non-casting action).

You should do interrogations via one-on-one emails before next session as much as possible. For the hour it takes you to handle two interrogations, that's an hour the other players have nothing to do but sit around. It is suboptimal.

Murderizing isn't always the best case. There are any number of reasons they want to capture people, such as ransom or hostage or information or experimentation or for the hell of it (greatly depends on who this Hosilla person is and where that person fits into any bad guy hierarchy).

Yeah, asking players is always a good idea. You sit down and say "Ok, so here's a recap - 1 dead, 2 captured, 2 hurt bad. We have a few options: I can say the captured characters died and the players roll new characters, I can launch a rescue operation with the captured character's players running NPCs, I can launch a break out with either the surviving character's players as NPCs or have them also captured and run it that way... what do you guys want to do?"

As the GM, ultimately you are simply there to facilitate the challenges and adjudicate the attempts to solve them while providing atmosphere and a story. If your players want to try an escape or a rescue, it is your job as the GM to make it the best darn escape or rescue you can!

For specific Wrath of the Righteous bits, I'd recommend posting in the Adventure Path's specific sub-forum. Readers there can offer good advice on things like "how to roleplay Hosilla as a captor" or the like.

In general, this kind of problem isn't uncommon. You can run it a few ways. If any of the players want to do brand new characters, you should discuss that option. They could represent recently arrived characters that the surviving PCs recruit for a rescue mission. At that point, you basically ignore any discussion of what is happening to the captured characters.

Another option is to have the captured characters transported to some kind of holding cell/dungeon/enemy base and run a side event in which they have to escape the cell, find their gear, kill the guards, and make it back to town. The players whose characters were not captured play fellow inmates at the dungeon and which go on their way when the PCs get back to town.

Alternatively, you run the same thing but from the point of view of the PCs who go away and have the players of the captured characters run new characters that were hired/volunteered to rescue the captured characters.

I'd also allow the players to choose whether to keep the one-shot character or go back to their original character after the side quest. And if things go so absolutely horrible, then, well, either the captured PCs are killed in the escape or the rescuers are tossed in jail with the captured PCs.

You could also take some GM liberties and say the surviving PCs rushed back the next day, tried to find their friends, got beat up, and ended up in the same dungeon. Now you run the escape attempt! Railroading is generally bad, but framing a narrative with cinematic description of heroic actions leading to a scenario that reunites the party while hand-waving away split-party problems can be acceptable.

Either way, this is a side quest. It has a few major benefits. First, it gets the players some extra money, treasure, and experience to help the next time they run the fight with Hosilla. At the low levels, a new sword or a few potions can help a lot. It also provides some players experience with other classes and how they fit into the group. It is also a fun event where the benefit is immediate and obvious and doesn't have any large overarching plot (which can sometimes be overwhelming and oppressive). It also gives them a chance to play a different sort of mini-adventure.

I'd say design the escape in a way that focuses more on exploration and clever thinking (how do you get out of the cell, how do you avoid the guards, do you help other prisoners, do you try to find the armory to steal stuff, how do you take care of problems before you find the gear, etc) than raw combat. The end goal should be escape/rescue, so don't make it too hard and be a bit... fast and loose with the encounters and situations.

My personal choice, based on what I like to do as a GM, would be to describe a failed rescue attempt (10-15 minutes of storytelling), put all the players in a dungeon, and run the escape over a session or two. Emphasis on skills and non-combat actions, though not necessarily stealth. Make my players puzzle out the best solutions, rather than just cut a path to the exit, though I'd have to make sure the players (maybe by overhearing a guard) understand that combat is not the optimal escape option.

Oracle of Metal! Those guys are pretty awesome! Alternatively, you could go with something like a Paladin or Inquisitor. The -2 dex already sets you up for something in heavy armor, so any of these would work. You also have to be able to cast cure spells or you might as well tell the other two to start planning a second party.

Yes, any weapon gains corrosive weapon. Based on how ranged weapons impart magical qualities onto the ammo they fire, it should also transfer to ammo fired.

It does not allow you to make melee touch attacks when you couldn't before, it simply upgrades any normal melee touch attack you would do. For example, using a spell like Shocking Grasp would do normal shocking damage plus an additional 1d6 acid damage. And technically so would delivering cure spells to allies, heh.

Edit: Note that it says "The wearer's melee touch attacks gain..." not "The wearer gains a melee touch attack which deals..."

1.1 - No.
1.2 - A move-equivalent action. A full attack that is stopped (by choice or interference) after the first attack counts as a standard action. Unless Monk Z was using flurry of blows. Of course, since he used a 5 foot step, he cannot actually move.

2.1 - No.
2.2 - A move action. This is the same as 1.2 except he hasn't used a 5 foot step, so he can do his normal movement.

3.1 - No.
3.2 - None. Since he performed the second attack, he had committed to a full attack, thus he has no other options.

4.1 - No.
4.2 - The only remaining option is a 5 foot move.

5 - No different than #3

6 - No different than #4

The problem is that you never have a reason not to ready the action, then. Walk up to the barghest and, instead of using a standard action to attack, just say you're using a readied action. You'd attack almost immediately since it is flickering reasonably fast. When would you not do it this way?

Speaking of flicker rate. A normal medium creature can double move for 60 feet in a full six second turn, which is 10 feat a second. So if there's a 50% chance you'll go corporeal during a 5 foot movement (0.5 seconds of movement) then you're almost certainly going to transition states a few times in a given turn and also that it is an unpredictable amount of time between transitions.

My understanding of blink is that you're basically flickering in and out at a very fast rate. The spell also states it occurs at random, rather than set strobe rates.

I'd say no.

If you're talking about that small a town, there would be no need for full time council. The guy running the one inn is probably also the mayor, a local farmer with some years of military service provides a bit of militia training, and there are no guilds. The town shares a blacksmith with a few other tiny villages in the same area. There may be a priest who goes from town to town to provide services and double as the doctor, but I wouldn't expect any kind of arcane casters in such a small place.

There simply isn't enough to do if the town is so small. If it is a tiny village, then that's because there's nothing important there to make people want to move there. If there is nothing important, then there's no reason to need someone to provide full time bureaucratic management of something. It also means very few people around to buy things, so not many craftsmen or the like.

I'm thinking something of that size would have a circle of elders, rather than a town council. Basically anyone above a certain age would have a say and they'd have monthly meetings. There would be one person who is determined to be the leader, whether it is the oldest of the elders, or voted on by the circle, or even whichever member of the circle has oldest claim to land in the area.

Yep. That dragon's full attack is 20/20/20/15/15/15, which is bite/claw/claw/wing/wing/tail If it hits with everything, it'll do 4d8+6d6+48 damage.

Most likely, you'd have a guild council that would have a liaison on the town council. You wouldn't want each guild on the town's council.

There should be a trade councilor with responsibilities of taxes, tariffs, and interacting with foreign merchants.

If it has a harbor, the master could either be under the trade councilor, on the guild council, or even have a seat on the town council if it is big enough.

Likewise, the farmers would have the same set-up depending on how important they are to the town and its business.

If the town is on the border of two countries, there may be ambassadors on the council.

Sure. In my mind, he puts his hand on the paper to start erasing and feels the click. Now he can't move his hand or it goes off AND ALSO he can't open his eyes or he might accidentally read the runes. Profit!

Also I have never actually done this because my players hate the idea of playing rogues and don't like traps. But some day!

Exactly! That's also when I'd put a pressure plate behind the paper so as soon as Roger starts to rub away at the rune, it causes a the wall to fall onto him.

As far as I know, the pathfinder system of monsters having set XP instead of having a relative player level/monster CR lookup chart shouldn't affect this much at all. The player xp progression was also modified to maintain a roughly 13 appropriately-difficult-fights-per-level idea.

If I understand the reason for 5000 xp for the new feat, it is the same amount of xp you needed to go from 5th to 6th level in 3.5. So in Pathfinder, that number should be more like 8000 if you're using the medium progression track. The fast track would require only 5k.

I've never done any of this system, so I can't offer any suggestions or experience.

No to both questions, at least according to the current rules.

There are various home rules and thoughts on these things because most alchemy items are utterly useless after the first few levels. However, as with all home rules, your GM would have to allow it.

I'd throw in the spellcraft +5/+10 thing because it may be considered best by the party to trigger a trap while in a safe spot than to try to disarm it and get the rogue blown to bits (or frozen or poisoned or body-swapped with a naked ghoul hiding in a coffin two rooms over, giving the impression that the rogue is now a ghoul because it is wearing all his clothes and gear).

It is a case of the relatively common misunderstanding of two-weapon fighting. It provides an additional iterative attack, made at your full BAB and with the offhand weapon. Iterative attacks, which means any attack after the first one, require full attacks. A simple confusion of terms and concepts.

Well... the Raven's Head isn't exactly required. Kind of an optional item that can cause some serious pain to the Whispering Way if they don't have it, thus they want it out of the hands of the players.

You'd be surprised how some people don't know the specific subset of rules like Vision and Light or the particular nuances of Cover and Concealment. Either way, as the GM, you'd want to be absolutely certain you understand them and that the player agrees with your interpretation BEFORE any event involving them comes up.

Also, the spell Shatter can be down right mean to an archer. Just saying.

Standard action allows a single attack (main hand). Full round action allows a full attack (main hand and offhand).

There's no way to actually get a second attack, even from your offhand knife, with a standard action.

I touched on this in my reply to your other post.

"I'd say the perception check finds the trap, spellcraft identifies the spell, and spellcraft + 5 determines the origin and direction of the spell. Maybe even +10 for destination/explosion point."

It wouldn't make sense for a player with perception to identify the spell being used in the trap; that is definitely the job of spellcraft. However, there should also be ways to prevent players from determining anything about it. For example. the entire trap array is secured in a lead lined box with a pinhole in one side. This would allow line of effect but wouldn't allow anyone to actually determine what the box contains.

Players may argue that even the pinhole is enough to get some feel for the magic aura. So make it two parts! First is the pinhole lead box, the second is a lead block that covers the pinhole. The purely mechanical trap removes the cover, which by moving, sets off the magical fireball trap and sends it launching through the pinhole.

Ah, the joys of lead boxes.

If you see no reason it cannot do it, and you do have reason to believe it can do it (specifically where it states that the trap produce the effects of any spells included in their construction), then... what's the question?

I'd determine the origin point of the fireball and the destination for the explosion ahead of time. Then when the trigger is hit, have the fireball travel along that line from origin to destination and explode if it loses line of effect or reaches its destination. I would also make it determinable by someone who can investigate the trap.

This allows the players to, say, put a door (what, your players don't carry around a large metal door in their bag of holding for times like this?) in the way of the origin and destination, then remotely trigger the trap and watch the fireball go off when it hits the door.

I'd say the perception check finds the trap, spellcraft identifies the spell, and spellcraft + 5 determines the origin and direction of the spell. Maybe even +10 for destination/explosion point.

Read up on the rules for lighting and cover. Between crowded alleyways, rooftop positions, random wagons, recessed doorways, piles of trash, water fountains, and vendor stalls, you can also have dark alleyways, shadowed rooftop positions, etc. Fog and rain can also cause trouble (I just realized that my players have NEVER fought in anything but beautiful clear weather... I need to fix that).

Also, remember to mix up the enemies. The fighter will need to decide to focus on the ranged attackers while the close-in types move in to get him in melee, or the incoming brawlers while the ranged attacks rain down on friends. Multiple angles of attack is always a good plan.

Lastly, read about how your allies can provide cover to badguys by standing in the way.

Oh, and make sure the fighter reads these things too.

Rules for Cover
Rules for Concealment
Rules for Vision and Light

In general, there is only one d20 rolled to apply spell effects. Either the caster rolls to make an attack (touch or otherwise) OR the target rolls a saving throw.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is going to be a bit complicated, but let me try to explain things.

When you grapple someone, both you and the target gain the Grappled Condition which, among various penalties, also prevents you from performing any Attacks of Opportunities.

If you aren't grappling anyone and get an AOO, such as someone trying to grapple you without the improved grapple feat, you can either use your AOO to attack them once (and get a free grab if you hit) or to perform one of several combat manuevers. Trip is one of them, as is sunder, so you can trip if someone provokes an AOO.

Now, once you are grappling someone, if you choose to harm them as part of your maintaining a grapple (other options: reposition, pin), you do automatic damage equal to one attack from a natural weapon or one handed weapon. You cannot choose to sunder INSTEAD of the free damage because you are not making an attack.

However, since you have Greater Grapple, you can maintain with a move action (normal is standard), leaving you a standard action remaining after maintaining the grapple (you have to do this every turn or the target is automatically freed). You can use your standard action to sunder his armor or weapon, but you have to make the normal sunder check (don't forget the penalties you get for having the Grappled Condition).

Since you can grab and greater grapple, you can do this: Turn one move up and punch him, then grapple with the free grab. Next turn, use move action to maintain and pin him, then the standard action to make a sunder attempt on his stuff. Every turn afterwards, make a maintain check to harm him then sunder more stuff.

Alternatively, you can maintain to harm, free action to let go, then punch and grab, then just repeat every turn. You know, if you're bored and want to play with your prey, heh.

Short Answer - No.

Long Answer - You are simply distracting the opponent. The 10 AC simply ensures you are able to not trip over your own weapon as you try to bother the bad guy. You are not assumed to touch the opponent, so you cannot deliver touch spells or suffer from any contact poisons the enemy has active. AC 10 is also the target for other simple tasks, like throwing an alchemist bomb at a specific square rather than a specific target.

Well, the difference in 18 vs 20 is one point of DC, which translates to 5%. So, if we approach this somewhat simplistically, one out of every 20 saving throws made against your spells would fail at an 18 stat where they would have succeeded at a 20 stat. There is also the extra bonus first level spell, which can be useful. It may also net you an extra point of damage here and there.

That said, what can you get from the seven point buy you save by only going to 18? That's probably a point of AC, some Hitpoints, maybe some skills? Seven is a lot in point buy and I've heard PFS rewards variety rather than min/maxed characters.

Thanks for the advice so far.

We just ended a rather unfortunately brutal TPK in Carrion Crown book 6 (the second official fight, even). So now we're looking for a game that will run far less linearly and with less fighting.

Unfortunately, I have to accept the reality that not all my players have the same level of familiarity or capability in roleplaying and some enjoy far more of the combative side where-in they prove their ability to min-max is greater than my ability to plan an encounter. While I enjoy a good combat as much as any GM, it isn't what is good for the group.

The game structure I'm looking to do is fixed base with scenarios rather than long traveling arc. Gives me flexibility to have combat sessions, social sessions, humorous sessions, murder mysteries, chases, formal dinners, and so much more. Also allows guest GMs and variable player numbers.

I've considered removing xp. I like the idea but it also removes one of the great levers a GM can use with players. Providing small bonuses/penalties as a means to reward, discourage, or offset actions is strong. Even +5% isn't functionally a lot, it is psychologically powerful. I have always run encounters as having a set XP regardless of the means used to bypass it and provided quest xp for noncombat stuff. But at the same time, I am aware at how much people love removing this feature from the game for so many reasons. Still uncertain here.

As for roleplaying the characters, I have accepted that I will never get some players to speak in character. It isn't worth the pain. They have good intentions but cannot seem to fully grasp it? I do, however, want to add a bonus to rolls based on how well a scene is played. Say from +1 to +5 based on the conversation and the player's effort (subjective to their ability). I also limit the ability of these skills to do the impossible (I don't care if you got a 47 on your diplomacy check, the king's guard is NOT letting you into the king's chamber without the king's personal word.)

I like the idea of restricting the bonus skill points to categories and to give a free profession point. Perhaps adjusting the points of classes so rogues and bards get nothing extra but the physical classes get a bit more. Otherwise being a fighter can be kind of... boring? It makes it hard to be a primary character in a social encounter.

The hardest part is retraining my players that skills are simply ways to approximate actions, not a restrictive set of activities that define the full set of what is possible in reality. Think in terms of character actions and I'll tell what is rolled to do it, don't just stare at the skill list to see what you may be able to do.

I have been pondering how, mechanically, to make Pathfinder more friendly to non-combat options. I have a mixed group of players that want different things and the structure of Pathfinder makes it hard even contribute in both combat and noncombat, let alone survive.

There are rules and skills and feats and traits that can be used, but they are decidedly less detailed than the those surrounding the combat side of things. Primarily this is because the combat rules seek to describe a predictable system for handing physical situations and because the consequences for failure in combat are far greater than in a social scenario.

It is hard to, say, pick Skill Focus over Weapon Focus in most Pathfinder games. I am, of course, ignoring either the prerequisite usage of Skill Focus or the cases where the skill is a combat-important one (bards with perform, rogues with bluff, spell casters with spell craft). Instead, assume something like Skill Focus (sense motive) because my character is a detective and I know my GM never uses the bluff skill in combat.

My initial idea is to allow the players a few extra skill points, say 3, plus one profession or craft. These would be usable on anything, but recommended to be used to broaden the character's non-combat usefulness. I'd also allow an extra feat every even level that cannot be a combat feat or used as prerequisites for combat feats. I think it could still be used in combat if it is applicable, such as Skill Focus (bluff) to do misdirection checks.

Does anyone else run house rules to make it easier to have entire sessions without combat? How do you keep the fighter interested and useful in a session where you have to be nice at a formal dinner? Any ideas that you have regarding my proposed changes or different proposals you'd like to suggest? I'm also interested in means of rewards to promote and encourage roleplaying.

Bite attack on trees aren't unusual, so I wouldn't worry about it. It could be a crack, knot, or burl in the trunk that is actually a mouth which bites the target.

My players like to roll dice far more than they like static values, at least for hit points (they will probably pull pitchforks and torches out of their bags if I suggest rolling stats). However, I run a slight modification; reroll if you come up with a value in the lower quarter(ish) of the die range. So d6 rerolls on a 1, d8 on a 1-2, d10 on 1-3, and d12 on 1-4. I know this isn't really much different than simply changing it up to be, say, d6 -> d4+2, d8 -> d6 + 2, etc. But this way is just more fun!

Well, the compulsion could be subtle and the PCs could assume they are just trying to avoid the curse side of things. In fact, a well crafted Geas can appear to be railroading by the GM when in fact it is the compulsion driving the players to make certain choices (mental note - use this in a game).

An important aspect of it would be your players being able to identify and approach the monster. Appropriate knowledge skills of a 17th level caster will be plenty to figure out what it is and that it can do some pretty nasty things. So tactically, the party would have to ensure they don't make it easy for the monster. If they know it has some circle-of-death style thing, they'll have to remain far enough apart as to make it not possible to snag more than one in a casting.

They can also throw up various buffs to help handle the particular casting. It may be that they still roll poorly, but something like Death Ward can make it very unlikely (possibly down to an 'anything but 1' roll). There may also be need by the casters to prepare necessary counter spells or other mitigation options (wish, miracle, time stop, quickened dimension door, etc) to react.

I don't think, especially at this level, a mass save-or-die is a concern for a party that is well prepared. Now, if you just have the monster walk into a bar and hit the entire common room without warning or preparation... that's a bit less nice of you and will feel more cheap (though would be a pretty awesome introduction: a loud busy bar full of people going suddenly silent and their bodies hitting the floor hanging in the air as the players turn to see the creature that just entered).

In the traditional system, you're a level 1 such and such because you received training towards that goal.

Running a game where you explore the 'before we were adventurers' setup, you could start at level 0 as commoners. Then after a little bit of xp (say half that for level 1), you gain a level in one of the NPC classes. Then after awhile in there, you can finally pick your real class. You drop your levels in commoner and NPC classes, replacing them with the real class level 1.

If you want, you could toss on small thematic bonus based on the NPC class you chose, but in general there won't be surprised. Adepts go on to be spell casters, warriors become fighters, etc.

Sure... just pick up Spring Attack and you're golden. Otherwise, I agree with the two GMs you quoted as well as Eridan. You'd be getting extra actions for free.

Every single custom magic item risks balance issues. You really have to approach each one as they come up. For example, I'd consider adding Resistance to any other cloak to be perfectly fine; the bonus to saves are basically a requirement at higher level, so no need to gimp players from having other cool cloaks because they can't afford losing +4 to all saves. It is also worth noting that the 50% price increase is usually enough to prevent any truly powerful combinations.

Put effort into increasing the village population. Clear more farm land, help expand a fishery, set up a trading post. I don't know the specific rules, but I predict that you would have to go in that direction. It sounds like very small settlements can't support even a bar.

Publicized adventures are meant for four players. You can always add more players to the party, but you will probably need to increase the monsters in the fights and the treasure found by 25-50% as well. It takes some fiddling with things to get the right balance.

You can also run all the monsters at max hit points instead of recommended amounts, so they last a bit longer. The stat block for a monster may say Hit Points: 23 (4d8 + 4), thus the max hit points would be 4 * 8 + 4 = 36. You can even give them all an extra bit of to-hit (+2 or so) and AC (again, +2 AC is good).

Conversational skill checks and associated activities are entirely up to the GM. In some cases, a diplomacy check may encompass many minutes of conversations, while a single shouted 'FIRE!!!' may represent a bluff check. The social skills (and specifically their social mechanics, vice something like slight of hand) are abstractions to separate a player's ability to actually act their character's part and the character's actual ability at talking.

Or allow a bonus cantrip/orison for each bonus 1st level spell they get for having a high stat. So a wizard with a 20 int would mean a total of 6 cantrips a day. However, having a low stat means you get no penalties.

Reply to NobodysHome:
NobodysHome wrote:

The saddest, most hilarious aspect of the TPK is how dependent it was on sheer party greed: The monk died fair up. As I read it, the swashbuckler intentionally took an attack of opportunity to go after the now-fallen-monk's loot. The inquisitor sacrificed his life in vain, since the swashbuckler was greedy. Then the barbarian, seeing all three of his party members dead, went in anyway to try to recover his loot.

I love it! An excellent learning exercise for all. "If you're all dead, there's no one left to spend the loot!"

(I have no idea about player dynamics -- could just be that the barbarian's player thought, "Ah, well, everyone else is dead. Might as well end it in a spectacular fashion," but it does make for a great read.)

Not quite. The Swashbuckler took an AOO to try and grab the Raven's Head mace from the doomed Inquisitor, then would have taken a second AOO to get down to the Monk and recover the party's common gear and money so they'd have half a chance to fight again another day. So it was meant to be a means of recovering the party funds and the most important item they had (can't let the mace get into the hands of the bad guys!)

The Barbarian Player knew the party was done and so he decided the Barbarian would never walk away from his +4 Adamantine Greatsword (and best friend) so he decided to run in and try to recover his weapon and die fighting. He didn't do either, heh.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Name: Who has time to remember names?
Race: Halfling, Elf, Human, Dwarf
Classes/levels: Swashbuckler, Inquisitor, Barbarian, Monk; all level 13
Adventure: Shadows over Gallowspire
Location: Banshee's Tower (D1)
Catalyst: Banshee

The Gory Details:
The party had just reached Renchurch and decided to clear out surrounding buildings before striking at the Cathedral. The Monk and the Barbarian were climbing the stairs to the tower's second story walkway when she reached out of the wall to caress the Barbarian's cheek. The terror effect drove the Barbarian into a panic. Dropping his greatsword, he ran out of the building and southeast. He was then shot by the sniping barbed devil in the belltower, so he turned and jumped through the destroyed enclosing wall, falling down the rocky hillside. This removed him for the duration of the fight.

The suggestion of a ghost of unknown concept, as no one who would be able to identify it had seen it, drove the Swashbuckler and Inquisitor to climb the iron ladder and get onto the top of the cage which was lashed to the Witchgate. They believed that standing upon such a barred construction would provide a solution against the Banshee's ability to strike them from behind the wall. The Swashbuckler was able to reach the top of the ladder, while the Inquisitor just started up it. The Monk also felt the soul-wrenching burn of the creature's touch, so he turned and jumped across to the cage in a stunning display of monk-like grace, though the enjoyment of such a performance would be (literally) short lived.

The Banshee took this turn to demonstrate her great hatred of the living. She took a single step through the wall and let loose with a powerful wail, as is her undead birthright. While it was unable to affect the Inquisitor and left the Swashbuckler ill to his stomach, the Monk fared far worse. His lifeless corpse fell from the top of the iron cell to crunch sickeningly into the dirt below.

The Inquisitor and Swashbuckler moved to the top of the cage and prepared for a fight. The Banshee charged in and struck a solid backhand through the cheek of the Inquisitor. The Swashbuckler attempted to strike her as she drew close but was able to do only cursory damage with his blade; ghosts are just not his forte. The Inquisitor offered his life to guard the Swashbucker's escape, so the nimble swordsman went to grab the Raven's Head Mace from the Inquisitor's belt before jumping down to recover the Monk's bag of holding and literally flying out with his winged boots.

Unfortunately, the momentary shift in his attention attracted a quick blow from the Banshee. The damage was painful but the combination of her mind-crushing terror and the continued effects of her scream drove the Swashbuckler into a crushing terror and he lept from the cage, taking another strike as he went.

The Inquisitor decided that he had no other choice, so he drew back his bow and struck at her with shot after shot. She struck him each time he drew and, in the end, he could not draw enough times. His lifeless corpse toppled backwards over the edge of the cage and it, too, landed with what can be assumed to be a messy crunch, if anyone was in their right mind to hear it. At this point, it was little effort for the Banshee to finish off the Swashbuckler as he cowered in terror.

The Barbarian, meanwhile, came to his senses and scrambled up the hill side to return to his party's aid. Unfortunately, he found all of them dead, so he made a dash to recover his most prized of possessions - his greatsword. Doubly unfortunately, he was once again terrified but was not able to escape before falling to her spirit-melting touch.

This was an adventure-ending Total Party Kill. I was relieved when the players lost their Wizard, thinking they wouldn't be able to teleport into this situation. Unfortunately, the desire to secure one's surroundings was too strong and they were surprised by what they found.

Best of luck to other parties; we all hope you can succeed where ACME Adventuring Company failed.

Well, it turns out I don't need to worry about how my players will do in the church or against the final fight.

The Banshee killed all of them as they examined her tower. They didn't even get teleported there; they were just clearing out the surrounding buildings and, after making quick work of the mummies, moved into the power.

Terror on the Barbarian (then repeated pokes when he came back to get his greatsword), Wail took out the Monk (surprised me; but he rolled quite poorly), Terror lead to the Swashbuckler's death, and the Inquisitor tried to shoot her at point-blank before she could poke him to death. He lost.

The players decided not to continue with an entirely new party, so we called the adventure and the Tyrant was successful in destroying the living world. I just don't think my players are capable of this amount of planning and preparing and general heavy duty tactics needed for this book (not a slight against the book, which is pretty awesome having read through it, but not something my particular players enjoy).

1 to 50 of 1,067 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.