Quandary's page

Feint is still out of line with other CMs which use d20 + CMB vs DC 15 + CMB.

That particular (hopefully not deceased) horse was flogged here.

Isn't it's formula more or less the same as Tumble's?

Whatever the specific base DC numbers for these, they seem at least consistent,
since Tumble and Feint are both skill-based checks, that don't actually "DO" anything TO the opponent, which is why they are DEX/CHA +skill based rather than STR + BAB based.

What's strange is that Feint is listed 'within' the Combat Maneuvers, even though it obviously isn't using the standard CMB rules, yet Tumble, which is using roughly the same rules as Feint, is only listed in the Skill section. At the least, Tumble needs to be listed next to Feint, with just a note in the skill section pointing to it's combat usage (like Bluff/Feint gets.)

I have one question for Jason to answer, though:
Is including Feint within the Combat Maneuvers meant to allow the use of the Agile Maneuvers Feat to apply DEX to Feints as well? (Tumble obviously doesn't need that help, already using DEX.)

Hopefully we'll get them cleared up at least (say, "and these maneuvers don't use CMB, but use DEX/CHA+skill vs. BAB+counterskill instead"), instead of shoe-horning Feint in at the end of the Combat Maneuvers without distinction outside of it's own specifics.

Quandary. Don't hate me. But i am still writing up your piece. I wanted to let you know where I am with it, however. I'm also working on some drawings (however what I draw ends up looking like i held the pencil in my teeth).

Hey, We're both online! :-)

Yeah, I have been checking periodically, but knew my write-up WAS pretty verbose, and also that you're running 2 (well, 3) of the other party members' Intro Threads (which seemed pretty verbose RP'ing when I peeked in), so it's totally understandable. And there's still Marla and Wolvenone's intro threads when I'm done, too :-).

I *LOVE* that photo you found (which reminds me of this cool book of really unique Japanse modern architecture I have in storage somewhere.) I had actually been thinking about it, and after I got the whole compound w/ garden idea, then wasn't sure where it would fit in Sharn, since it would need Sky access for the garden & my landing platform (I had even thought it would be necessary to locate it in some of the small shantytowns exterior but adjacent to Sharn proper.) But that Osaka design definitely seems the way to go.

I'm still really excited to play though!

Hm, I think it's pretty obvious to all that the Fighter as written, while great in that they have alot of Feats to work with, doesn't compare with the new Paizo-fied spellcasters (Wizards with spontaneous casting via Bonded Item with higher spell levels than Sorcerors to boot?!?!? At least that should be @ 1 level lower than their highest spell, otherwise it's a joke on Sorcerors), and their special class abilities are nothing more than mere +1/x bonuses, which just don't cut it.

I saw a great post on here a while back, that I thought was worthwhile to bring up again:
Give the Fighter the ability to segmentize their turn. This means that they can take an immediate action, and put the rest of their actions on hold until a later point in the round. So if the BadGuy moves to escape, they can cut him off. Or take advantage of a flanking position one of their allies opens up. Or move to protect a spellcaster, and then wait until the caster's spell goes off before taking advantage of the buff and Full Attacking. It's not unbalancing, and really lets the Fighter make the most of their tactical abilities. It probably should be something like a 3rd or 4th level ability to prevent 1-level dipping.

That doesn't really bring the Figher up to the level of the game, though.
I think the easiest path, and most non-Flavor disrupting, is to actually make the Figher the "Master of Feats" like they're already supposed to be.

Why not let the Fighter's Fighter Bonus Feats IGNORE one 'level' of the Feat 'Trees'. This means, for example, the Fighter could 'skip' Dodge, and take Mobility straight away. They could only 'skip' Feats with their Fighter Bonus Feats, but could still 'build on' any Feats they have with their regular odd-level feats. I don't think this is too over-powering, and really makes the Fighter the "Feat Master" they're obviously supposed to be. (And since the Ranged Weapon Path Ranger already 'skips' a Feat, the mechanic is already built into the game)

I don't think adding other special abilities (magical/pseudo magical, etc.) is the way to go. I think allowing the Barbarian a certain amount of pseudo-magical abilities works flavor-wise, but I really think this one change with Feats really lets the Fighter shine where they're supposed to. At higher levels, the Fighter should really be equipped with items (Prot/Evil, Freedom/Movement, Charges of True Strike to pull off insane CMB moves, etc.) to help cover up their weaknesses, and in a party, they should be the ones that the caster wants to Buff so that they can multiply all their Feats with the benefits of the Buffs.

Adding this change to the Fighter Bonus Feat really helps the Fighter 'wade thru' the forest of not-that-great Feats to get to the 'good stuff', while maintaining the "really easy to use" aspect, which I think is an important and viable role for the Fighter class, i.e. easy for beginner players to pick up and not have alot of abilities to "keep track of" (as well as BadGuys that are simple to generate and play for the DM). I do think Paizo really needs to improve some of the Feats they have, besides adding in new ones... (How about a "Bleed" which applies significant DoT that forces Spellcraft checks? Or "Disorientating" strikes which interfere with casting or limit actions? Etc, Etc.) The Fighter needs good feats to really become on-par with the game as a whole. But I'm sure that will happen by the time the final product is released to print...

Like Maezer said, look at the Renewed Vigor rage ability.

Treating rage bonus HPs as temporary HPs pretty much reduces the benefit of Renewed Vigor to WORSE than nothing (since you're wasting rage points to use the ability, as well as staying in rage instead of dropping out and back again to gain temporary HPs.) Treating them as temporary HPs which can be renewed everytime the Barbarian enters Rage, is basically giving the Barbarian Damage Resistance X (scaling with level!!!) EVERY round they enter Rage, which is absurdly exploitable. Sure you can add MORE rules so to control it's exploitability, but what's the need in the first place?

I don't see what's 'counter-intuitive' about the Rage HPs vanishing once Rage is left. It makes much more sense to me to view the Rage HPs as akin to how the Die-Hard feat works, i.e. the Barbarian can ignore wounds that might drop a regular warrior, but EVENTUALLY they will catch up to the Barbarian. Otherwise, you're basically giving the Barbarian 'magical' self-healing.
Which sounds more "Raging Barbarian" like???

So at high levels, sure, the Barbarian will stick around taking a ton of damage while staying in the fight, but then they'll drop, needing some healing/ Raising from the party healer, but at high levels, that shouldn't be a problem... If high HP characters are fighting until low (or zero) HPs, they're just going to need a lot of healing to recover 100%, no way around it. At low levels, it really just means the Barbarian might want to think twice before using ALL their Rage Points up (on expensive abilities, etc) if they're taking alot of damage and aren't sure they can get healing right away...

Game-wise, I think the best way to handle the bonus HPs is DON'T add them to your total, keep them separate, and once your character drops to 0 hp, he WILL drop when he leaves Rage, but any further damage is taken away from his Rage points. There STILL is a lasting benefit from the bonus HPs because since "TOTAL DAMAGE TAKEN" is never accounted for separately from Hit Points, damage *IS* ABSORBED BY THE BONUS RAGE HPs. In MOST cases where the Barbarian drops after Rage, his HPs will still be at 0 (or better than -10) where he has ample chance to stabilize (or if he has Die-Hard feat, he can even drop a potion his self), instead of -27 (or something) HPs (DEAD MEAT) if the bonus Rage HPs had not 'taken' the damage.

I think Paizo SHOULD emphasize that the Rage HPs should be accounted for separately than the regular HP pool, because if you merge them into one larger pool, it can get confusing when you leave Rage.

I don't think you can turn the Acrobatics check into a combat maneuver. Combat maneuvers in Alpha 2 are something you do to an enemy or the items he carries. Acrobatics used to move through a threatened area or to move through an enemy's space are a defensive action. I don't feel that the mechanism should use your own CMB against a DC. After all, your BAB or your STR don't make you harder to hit.

Well, Tumble is pretty much using it's own variant CMB (for the DC), except you only get to roll your own Tumble ranks, not based on your own CMB.

What I don't quite get is that Tumble to bypass an enemy/ move thru his square, is practically the same as the Combat Maneuver Over-run, right?, except that if you beat the DC by 5 or more in Over-Run, you can knock the guy prone as well (but then again, just attempting a Trip on him first would do the same thing, and I believe you can move thru a square of a prone opponent, certainly I would allow that as a DM if a player gave up their AoO for a Tripped opponent (if they rolled well enough).

I think it's kindof strange have two totally different mechanics, both roll-wise and skill/feat-investment wise, to achieve such similar things, especially since non-class skills are less problematic in Pathfinder. I guess the thing is Acrobatics doesn't let the opponent use STR or Defensive Training/ Size Bonuses to their actual CMB (Just BAB), but requires a constant point investment to scale with level, while Overrun means you only take one feat which scales with level, instead of using your skill ranks every level(good for low-Int/skill characters) and you can use your own STR as well(good for low DEX characters).

So in a way, I guess it's an artifact of the d20 system as opposed to a totally skilled based system... And having separate rules for Tumble and Over-Run lets both Rogues/skill monkeys and Fighers have good ways to get away with this sort of move...

I think I understand how it makes sense, but it's still too bizarre... :-)

It's an easy, elegant way that lets PCs and monsters have a 'standard' maneuverability (as per MM and Spell Descriptions) and increase that if they put the skill ranks in... Pretty nice, IMHO

Cool, no worries, enjoy yourself!

And yeah, that makes sense (your description of the Guards/ Lyrandar forces)...
Sounds like double the opportunities for corruption! :-)

Starlan's pretty much good to go, except I *SHOULD* actually figure out the number of "tricks" my Glidewing knows based on Handle Animal ranks, and maybe a few random synergies, like from Tumble... Maybe we can chat about his character a bit "out of character" as well...

Something I just noticed looking at the Alpha rules again:

The new feat "Agile Maneuvers" lets you use the DEX bonus for your CMB instead of STR, but within the 3.5 OGL there is the common feat "Weapon Finesse" which applies the DEX bonus to attack rolls with lt. weapons, rapier, whip, spiked chain, natural weapons.
Since the CMB is an "attack roll", do these 2 feats apply your Dex bonus twice??? (I don't know if that's TOO overpowered for 2 feats, but it's very unclear/non-intuitive...) It seems like both of these feats could be rolled into one, replacing the old "Weapon Finesse"/ new "Agile Maneuvers" with "Combat Finesse", applying your DEX bonus to attacks with appropriate weapons AND CMB's....???

Re-reading the CMB rules, I also thought that given the usual AoO opponents get before the CMB is resolved, feats which allow you to allocate your BAB towards your own AC (Combat Expertise, etc.) would have a major net positive, by increasing your chances you won't receive any damage at all, thus giving you a much easier CMB penalty (while saving your own hit points to boot).
Would it also make sense to let the "Improved Combat Maneuvers" and/or "Defensive Training" feats, give you a bonus to your AC for AoOs resulting from your own Combat Maneuvers???

It'd also be nice to have at least a bit written on how REACH weapons interact with CMB, since if you have reach advantage over your opponent they can't get an effective AoO.
...But if someone is using a longspear to Bull Rush someone, thereby avoiding an AoO, wouldn't it make sense to apply the weapon's damage as normal, in addition to the Bull Rush? If that is allowed, it brings back the opponent's armor into the equation...
So perhaps using a single roll, there would be an AC to-hit(damage), and a CMB difficulty (to cause X effect, i.e. Bull Rush)... Of course, of the Combat Manuevers, only Bull-Rush and Sunder(Armor) really apply body hits which might threaten damage...

I like the general direction CMB is going, but I think it has to be spelled out and these things cleared up. If it's done right, if CMB is simple & intuitive, yet flexible & dynamic, I think it can really liven up play and make it more fun all-around. And I think it's an important aspect of game balance - Things like the combined attack/CMB-Bull Rush/Sunder Armor really seem like Fighter/Barbarian/Paladin material, which helps give a little more to those classes in relation to the caster classes.

well, I hope we can get some clearer explanantion of how this all works with the next Alpha 3 (or at some point!)

If Jason/ the Pathfinder team is reading this, I would also suggest listing CMB modifiers in the same place attack modifiers are listed. For example, in the Halfling/ Gnome racial ability listings, the Small size attack BONUS is listed, but the CMB PENALTY for Small size is not, it's only mentioned elsewhere in the CMB section, which if someone is creating a character (and they're not accustomed to small characters) is very non-obvious...

Hopefully things like this will get explained more clearly, once it's getting towards being ready for print...
I just was putting together a halfling character using the Alpha rules, and couldn't figure out what the hell I was reading between two different sections' rules :-)

This may be noted as an error already,
but under the Halfling race section,
they are listed as receiving +1 to-hit from Size (small),
yet in the CMB section Size (small) receives a -1 penalty to CMB.

It seems like CMB is basically using the same mechanics as attack rolls,
so perhaps this is an error...

If you're interested, here's a link to the Urban Druid, I think.

Hm, I checked that out, but it's not really the feel I was going for,

(if anything, I'd be more likely to go for Urban Ranger levels than Druid)

but I do think I'll take the Halfling Druid substitution level thing,
and there's a Plains/Savannah terrain weapon list that would make sense for a Halfling druid...

I better start writing up the sheet before it gets more complicated though...

I think it's important to keep the "Wild Shape x/day" as a core Druid ability (though it could be given up in exchange for other focus), especially since it is amenable to the types of feats like Clerics have for using a turn attempt to achieve some other effect, which gives the player some (variable) x/day special effect outside of their general spells.
There could be some other way to achieve the same end, but this is already part of the Druid motif, and they'res already feats out there that use this mechanic...

dahn, i actually got excited about the halfing/dinosaur thing,
so I think I'm going to go for that, specifically a druid/rogue from Sharn, who got into the pterodactyl connection, and also connected more with the druids/nature while travelling/flying outside Sharn.

anyhow,
I was wondering how I should handle it, if I wanted to start with a riding 'dactyl for my character... There's a feat which gives you +3 levels re: your animal companion, so I figure that should be enough to qualify for a 3HD pteranodon...

Anyhow, hopefully I can pull together a character sheet soon,
I found 2 avatars that seem to fit the bill (X & Y)

No; I decided to go with a Changeling Rogue/Enchanter. A con artist of sorts.

Shoot, that halfling w/ riding-teradactyl bit sounded so fun :-)...

What is that bit about the "choose 1 Cleric/Wiz/Druid spell" anyhow?

OK so far I'm seeing:

Arctaris Halfling Inquisitive
Wolvenone Shifter? Rogue&Fighter?
Fleck 1/2Orc Barbarian
Quandary Human/1/2Elf Sorceror &(Rogue/Hunter)

Wolvenone mentioned ranger at one point,
I don't know if it'd be appropriate if anyone wanted
to play an as-yet-unreleased Alpha class, to 'fake it',
say with a fighter level until the real class is announced...?

...so is Arctaris gonna take a feat to have a pet riding Teradactyl? :-)

anyhow, kind-of Rogue-heavy party, interesting...

also, by the 1st level Cleric/Wiz/Druid spell, is this
an innate spell that all players will have 1x/day or something?

...I'll try and work up a C-sheet this weekend-ish...

I don't know about any crunchy stuff yet, but for a character concept,
I'm now thinking of a multiclass sorceror & rogue, or possibly ranger(urban?), bringing in it's favored enemy for story/flavor. Either Human or 1/2Elf.

I think for the character's background, they ended up spending some time in Xendrik, where their parents were somehow engaged for a period (figure a sort of S. American/ 'Wild West' squalid rush for riches), but have managed to get back to 'civilization'. If I go the Half-Elf route, they would either be from both Half-Elf parents within Sharn (and perhaps strongly dislike Elves), or maybe half-Drow from the Xendrik background...

...I like the way the Alpha is shaping up, and would be happy to go that way for this game... Though I certainly expect alot of details, especially the sorceror powers, to change, which shouldn't be that big of a deal, although slightly funny if one week my character is ripping it up with claw attacks and the next week ends up 'de-clawed'. 8-)

hm, I had even thought recently about other, non-magical, means of flying around sharn, and thought of halflings on teradactyls :-) (nix that)

is it going to be a very Sharn/urban focused game you think?
how big a party of PCs do feel would work best?

cool, I like the whole bonus skills for more rounded characters,
I tend to always put some of that into any character I make, but it's nice to not be at some 'disadvantage' to some uber-dungeon-ninja.

were you thinking of running with the new Alpha rules,
or sticking with vanilla SRD/3.5? any special house rules,
especially that might affect character choices...?

hm, I somewhat like starting @ lower levels too, but starting @ 2nd or 3rd is nice in that multiclass characters can start out w/ both classes...
A mix of combat/action with roleplay/intrigue would take my vote too...

I'm sort of waiting on another game to actually start, but it seems to be rather slow to get rolling.... I'm not sure if I really want to be in 2 PBP games at once, but since the other one isn't doing anything now, and I'd dig an Eberron game, I'd probably be happy to try this one out...

Or you could be really fancy about it, since I do enjoy the flavor of it at least, and go with the racial substitution levels (or since I do not believe thats in the OGL) call them replacement abilities or racial power variations. Adding 3-5 abilities for each race for about 3 classes that can be adjusted toward a racial tinge. So they can be different without being more powerful.

Just some thoughts

I agree here, if it's going to be kept at all, it should be something that adds flavor more than stats. I mean, what with the hit-die inflation, a wizard with 'favored class' (and all humans are getting that bonus for their main class) will be getting 7 hp/ 1d6+1, which is statistically equal to a 'non-favored class' cleric or other d8 hp class.

(but then I'm getting into my disagreement with the hit-die inflation, especially of the wizard... although Sorceror->d6 does makes some sense)

I thought I'd mention the dropping of the "burrowing animal" language
as an option... c'mon, how is chittering with the squirrels NOT fun?

Also, since gnomes are pretty much fey-descended, why not just make Gnomish=Sylvan as far as languages...

...my 2cents

Ok, I finally rolled up and wrote some background for a character.
So here's Dunzeltof Haelcannon, a dwarven cleric of Shelyn.

here's the rolls I used for him

Any suggestions, Lilith?

Oh, also when checking out the craft rules, it turns out you need a whole feat in order to make masterwork weapons. Which would mean you would need 2 whole feats if you were a magic user trying to make your own magic-enchanted weapons by yourself...

I had always just played with masterworks being a higher DC to make, but anyone with a decent enough craft score could make (although a feat where you didn't need to make the check anymore would still seem useful)

I'm just intereted in this as my character being able to make his own high-quality bows & whatnot, and that being part of his tribal heritage...
Not that I expect it to be some 'goldmine' within the game, selling gear, just to be able to have high quality/ 'respectable' hunting gear without having had to buy it from some special merchant...?

Thanks Lilith, you made the spell points sound alot easier to use!

For the dwarven cleric, there IS stuff about Abadair that I like the sound of (and I had already imagined a hvy repeating crossbow as this guy's prefered weapon), but I kind of imagined he was 'going outside of' the more straight-laced expectations of his conservative family and the "Luck" focused gods seemed more in line, along with his gambling background :-)

Hm, for the other character, it sounds like I could just say his father was full-blood Orcish-Shoanti (I had assumed that there might be a 50/50 chance of a half-orc and human's child of being considered either half-orc or full human). I probably would want to go that way since those blood-line rules seeme to give up alot for a whole character level (hit die, +EVERYTHING)

I guess for that character, I also wondered if a half-Orc should get either a human-like bonus feat, or some race/culture-specific skill bonuses (+Listen for lupine ears, +Sense Motive for 'orc intuition', +Hit for 'racial' weapons...for example). I also wondered about the urban ranger, it seems like there isn't ANY substitutions for the lost Camo/WildStride, which seems like they should at least just be regular bonus feats, since otherwise why not make your own variant ranger with terrain:Urban and a different class skill list?

I'm still liking how both these character concepts are developing,
but hopefully I'll decide soon :-)

OK, character idea #2;

Dwarf raised like most others in the city within one of
the Dwarven trading clans. Perhaps one of his siblings
(which brings up a question I've always had: how do the
long-lived races (dwarf, elves especially) work out re:
ages of reproduction, # of offspring over life, sex, etc...?)

fell into a bad situation, perhaps gambling debts, and he tried
to help his sibling extricate from the situation, but Gaedran
used their gullibility to frame them up to cover up a crime...
He eventually proved his innocence, but it stained the family
name, and his sibling was killed in the process...
(Deep grumbling dwarven emotions stirred...)
(that sounds good, I bet dwarves like gambling alot)

beyond that, I'm not sure, probably some sort of magic-user cleric, which also sounds like it'd be a good class balance with the other character ideas people are posting (alot of fighters).
I'd probably go for Luck & Magic/Elemental domain focus...
...although that reminds me, the magic point system seemed cool, until the part about damage-dice adjustment, and then I lost it... Lilith, do you think it's simple enough for me to handle? :-)

he also could have connections with the other characters thru his family's business, trading weapons/goods, or maybe he had just made friends with them while enjoying the wilder side of the city, and now he's seeing who's got the goods to back him up now that he's cleared himself of Gaedran's frame-job.

...variant wise, what do you think Lillith? I kind-of liked the idea of switching the turning to extra-planar/demonkind (Chelax sounded quite demon-infested), but it seems like I should only do that if that's really gonna be useful, otherwise, everyone will be groaning when we run into the vampire mafia and the only cleric gave up his undead turning... :-)

Okay, the board ate my last post, so I'll make it short n sweet:

I'm not 100% familiar with all the variant rules, so I thought I'd at least put up my general character ideas, and figure out the details/mechanics later...

1/2Orc ranger. "He's half orc, half-shoanti, and half-varisian. Orcs know very advanced secret mathematics" He grew up in the city, but still holds onto tribal traditions learned from his father (maybe has mastercrafting in bows/arrows/spears... Which could be one of his professions, selling them in the city... I don't know if I like the crafting point system though..) I like the whole feel of the Shingles, so I probably grew up there, sometimes stable, sometimes going from squat to squat. (I like the Shingle feat, but don't know if I'll choose another one.) Father's gone. Mother... was Varisian fortune teller/mystic, perhaps died due to Gaidran Lamm's devilry. Other details/mechanic questions: Urban Ranger variant seems cool, yet both the Woodland Stride and Camouflage level-gained abilities have NO substitution... HM? Also, I like the whole half-orc idea for story reasons, but it seems that they have no racial benefit besides darkvision (compare to dwarf, elf, etc.), so it seems they should get the bonus feat like humans... or else I could even be a "1/4 orc" who counts mechanics-wise as a human... Lilith? :-)

hm... I also had an idea of a Dwarf... I'll post that one later...

hm, so are you thinking of any particular party make-up?

Radavel: Hm, well with the characters ideas I mentioned (orc-ish f/ranger, dwarven rogue/cleric both semi-aligned with the Gatekeepers, but not druids) I think I'd like a campaign where the characters are more specifically motivated together... That being said, not knowing how your character really feels about what they're running into/dealing with is interesting too (plus it keeps the group dynamic more interesting), but it feels more engaging for there to be substantial commitments within the party, but still flexiblity enough to keep it loose.)

but what else I'd like to see in a Eberron campaign:
the whole goblin kingdom & races seem interesting, perhaps hidden historic events catching up with the current time, dealing with goblins more complexly than "ugly green guys, let's rip 'em up!" feels more interesting to me...
...and I generally like the feel of all the 'mysteries' of the world, of the cold north where dwarves used to live but don't remember so much, the jungle civilizations of xendrik, sarlonna, gatekeepers/demons, plus the dragons...

...but thanks for the advice, I just joined on this board,
so I'm sure if I keep posting like I have, something'll show up
(and I'm already on the 'back bench' for a few games)

I was hoping to play an Eberron game also (as a player also 8-/),
so maybe we can find some momentum for something like that...

I had two character ideas,
one a half-orc fighter-ranger type, semi-aligned with the Gatekeeper Druids,

and the other a roguish-cleric Dwarf, more mystical Indiana Jones than sectarian priest, though... but who respects the orcs/Gatekeepers alot for their battle with the Demons from the Plane of Madness...

I actually thought those two would be a great combo together,
so maybe someone else'll like to play something like one of them,
or we can find a DM who likes to keep a PC "of their own" in the party...

Hi, it looks like I might be too late,
but another subscriber pointed me here thinking there might still be some space open in this game...

I've been wanting to play something in the Eberron setting,
and had sortof been rolling around the idea of either a half-orc fighter/ranger or dwarven cleric/rogue...

8-)

New to this board, I wanted to try playing as a character before DMing
(++I don't have all the books here to DM at the moment)

I liked the Eberron setting/story,
and had the idea to play a half-orc fighter/ranger semi-aligned with the Gatekeeper Druids, sent out by the tribe to learn and make allies, along with a dwarven roguish/cleric who tends to get along with orcs/Gatekeepers from the mutual tribal backgrounds and history fighting Aberration invasions... (I thought a party with those two would be a good start)

anybody itching to DM an Eberron campaign?

I just recently discovered paizo's site here,
but I wanted to leave my feedback about your work,
actually your Kotalya demon-nymph
(I thought I'd post it here, since it seems the active/current thread)

...I noticed alot of comments on how there wasn't much MOTIVATION, etc, of the Kotalya character, some actually liking it, and I actually appreciated it as well, because if I am actually going to use some element like this is in a campaign, I need a certain room to imagine AROUND it, or fit it into my specific campaign world...

the unexplained WHY she left the Demon plane to muck around some corner of the material plane with no big goals leaves so many options to link into, certainly suggesting PROBLEMS on the Demon plane that made a sabbatical in the sticks a more safe choice...

Equally, I thought the evil druids could be connected to a larger faction of them, specifically reminding me of the evil Desert Druids in the Bereket nation created by another writer in this contest (!)...

...and either of those plots (or BOTH) could be a way to BRING the characters to Kotalya (as a side-track from bigger epic conflicts, bringing more information/connections/important loot) or to LEAD them into those larger dramas thru information gleaned from Kotalya & minions, or evidence from the aftermath.

Good job & good luck on the final round!