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

Ron Lundeen's page

Contributor. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Class Deck Subscriber. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 376 posts (953 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 14 Pathfinder Society characters. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 80 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
zeroth_hour wrote:
So if a character plays a Tier 3 pregen starting Adventure 4, she'll never be able to get a role card.

It's to save them from the Umbral Dragon.

Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.

This was so much fun to do! Thanks for letting me kick off the guest blog series!

** Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Like many criminals, they got caught because they were greedy. Meanwhile, over here, I'll just keep buying 10 quarterstaves at a time (for 0 gold) and selling them as 2 days of firewood (for 1 cp).

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I found everyone involved to be exceedingly flexible, especially when I brought a group of players that were all Tier 1, with Adventure 3 tickets, and each with unique lists of scenarios they'd already played. I can't imagine the logistics to pull that off, but it was well and skillfully done all three times we came by to play.

Thanks!

Ron

Contributor

5 people marked this as a favorite.

What do you do when you've gone through the entire Skull and Shackles adventure path for the PACG? Rearrange the cards and do it again!

The Bloodlust Corsairs adventure path is an entirely new 35-scenario adventure path with an independent story. It uses only the cards from the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game: Skull and Shackles base set and its six adventure decks--no need to print your own cards (but you will need all six adventure decks to play it). It includes two new rules: one for using your ship as a location, and another for playing any character as a wereshark!

You can download it from WelbyBumpus.com for free.

Get it, play it, and let me know what you think (and how I can improve it!).

Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
First World Bard wrote:
Alternatively, I might give the Shield of Rannick a try. If I try to solo it, I'd probably use Meliski; I've been itching to see how he'd do going Brawler with access to Amulets of Mighty / Fiery fists.

Well, Shield of Rannick is pretty awesome, I'll admit. :-) If you can wait a few days, you can try Bloodlust Corsairs--my adventure path with the Skull and Shackles set--and see what you think. I've honestly playtested very little of that with just a solo character (my usual group is 3 players), and I'll be interested to see what a solo run of that is like.

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Myfly wrote:

Could you here provide the links to your

Drivethru cards which are available for your pdfs.

Sure! You'll need one High Priest Y'Ganok villain available here.

You'll need one Bhole Jaws villain available here.

You'll need players + 1 (that is, up to seven) Titanic Bulk henchmen available here.

You'll need players + 2 (that is, up to eight) Denizen of Leng henchmen available here.

Please give it a try and let me know what you think!

Ron

Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Micronian wrote:

The ability to create a custom campaign with all available PACG cards is a huge plus to extending the life of the product beyond just playing the base sets. Having a product that’s professionally designed and balanced for adventures beyond level 6 would be something I believe would sell very well.

What do you guys think?

Well, I'm a professional game designer, and I wrote Shield of Rannick, a full adventure path with 30 all new scenarios for your Rise of the Runelords game. I also wrote Mhar of Leng, a five-scenario "Adventure 7" for Rise of the Runelords. Both are absolutely free at welbybumpus.com, and I suppose that sells very well! :-)

I'm working on a new adventure path for the Skull and Shackles set called Bloodlust Corsairs. I haven't yet decided whether my project after that will be an adventure path for the Wrath of the Righteous set, or a large cross-over requiring all three base sets. Probably the latter, I think.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Troymk1 wrote:
To most players, such abject failure to progress would be highly discouraging.

This is quite true. Let me give two data points from my own experience:

1) A year ago, I bought the LotR card game to play with my wife. We chose starting decks as recommended in the rules, and enjoyed the first scenario. We lost the second scenario in a quite demoralizing way, tried it again, and lost it again. I looked up online the next day, and found that a specific deck build--one not clearly presented in the rules--is necessary to win that particular scenario. We planned to try that deck trick someday, but that was a year ago-- we've shelved the game and haven't opened it since. I was telling someone the other day that I'm just not a fan of this game because it's crippling second-scenario difficulty lost me as a casual player.

2) My wife and friend and I are huge fans of the PACG. Despite the suggestion to play Adventure 1 before Adventure B, we've decided to go in the "normal" order. We loved scenario B-1 (The Godless Ones) and beat it on our first try. But we've lost scenario B-2 (The Elven Entanglement) four times and it's killed Kyra once. We will try it again for sure; but if we weren't already a fan of PACG, it would have been shelved just like the LotR card game for us.

I conclude that the uneven and harsh difficulty will cause people to shelve this game, unfortunately.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey, all. I'm writing my next full adventure path, which uses the Skull and Shackles base set. It's called Bloodlust Corsairs, and it uses two new sets of rules. The first of these is presented below, and I'd like to get some feedback on it. These are rules for playing lycanthropes; they are powerful, but can be very dangerous if your lycanthropy is reckless or ill-timed. In Bloodlust Corsairs, the PCs become were-sharks--hammerhead sharks and tiger sharks initially, but dire sharks and such later on--but I want rules that work equally well if you want to be were-crocodiles or were-stirges or were-bandits or whatever.

Please give me any comments, criticisms, or edits you have!

Lycanthropy
If a scenario uses the Lycanthropy rules, assemble the lycanthropy cards indicated in the scenario instructions. These are the lycanthropy cards for the scenario. Shuffle them together. After drawing starting hands, each character chooses one of the lycanthropy cards at random without looking at it and shuffles it into his deck. Set any unused lycanthrope cards aside without looking at them.
Hybrid Form
When you draw a lycanthropy card, display it next to your deck; your character is now in animal-humanoid hybrid form. Your character remains in hybrid form as long as the lycanthrope card is displayed.
While your lycanthrope card is displayed, you may use the “Check to Defeat” number on your lycanthrope card in place of your Strength die result instead of rolling your Strength die. If the top card of the blessings deck is a Blessing of the Gods, increase this number by 3. You cannot play weapons on a check if you choose to use this number as your result. Blessings or other abilities that would add dice to your check add your normal Strength die.
Example 1: Lini is playing scenario 2-B and has her lycanthrope card—a Hammerhead Shark henchman—displayed. When she encounters a Zombie monster, she chooses to use the “Check to Defeat” number on her lycanthrope card, which is 9 + 2 (for the adventure deck number) of 11 in place of her Strength die result for the combat check, defeating the Zombie.
Example 2: Valeros is playing scenario 3-B and has his lycanthrope card—a Tiger Shark—displayed. He encounters a Giant Anaconda and chooses to use the Tiger Shark’s “Check to Defeat” of 11 in place of his Strength die result. He has the skill Melee +3 and notes that the Blessing of the Gods is atop the blessing discard pile, for another +3. He plays a Blessing of Pharasma from his hand, which adds 1d10 (his normal Strength die). His result is 11 + 3 + 3 + 1d10, for a 21, which defeats the Giant Anaconda.
The Lure of Blood
At the beginning of your move step, put a marker on your lycanthrope card. You may then attempt a Wisdom check to remove all markers from your lycanthrope card and discard it (your character returns to humanoid form). The difficulty of this Wisdom check is 5, plus the number of markers on your lycanthrope card. If the top card of the blessings deck is a Blessing of the Gods, increase the difficulty of this Wisdom check by 3.
Although your lycanthrope card is discarded, it could end up back in your deck (if you use a Potion of Healing, for example). If you draw it again, your character again assumes a hybrid form.
The Red Rage
If the game ends while your lycanthrope card is displayed, you go into a frenzied rage and come to your senses much later with equipment missing and erstwhile allies slain. Shuffle together your deck, discard pile, displayed cards (other than your lycanthrope card) and buried cards; then banish 1 random card, plus 1 additional random card per marker on your lycanthrope card. Then rebuild your deck as normal.
End of the Game
Banish your lycanthrope card at the end of a scenario.

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm really excited they let me contribute those scenarios, and I was very happy to see them at PaizoCon as well!

You can get it for FREE, linked here. The article is called "Playing Cards in Ustalav." You don't need any cards to play them other than the Rise of the Runelords set.

Please let me know what you think of the scenarios!

Contributor

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Man oh man oh man oh man. I'm *SO* excited to see this. Because these:

Item - Lymirin Discourses (2)
Item - Pauper's Thighbone (3)
Loot - Barding of Pleated Light (2)
Loot - Fiendsplitter (3)

...are items I wrote for this adventure path!

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason S wrote:
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.

I'll tick through with my experience. I played 4 sessions at PaizoCon.

Jason S wrote:
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?

4, 4, 5, 5

Jason S wrote:
What level was the player skill? Better than expected? Less than you expected?

Better than expected, especially from the guy who had barely played the game before.

Jason S wrote:
Did anyone roleplay? :)

If you mean, "did something that didn't seem like a good idea because they felt it was what their character would do," the answer is no. And Kyra didn't ever shout "Blessing of the Dawnflower upon you!" before using Cure, or anything like that.

Jason S wrote:
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).

Only once. One of the other players and I weren't sure how a summoned creature and location interacted. But Tanis happened to be right there to set us straight. (Quite a perk of playing at PaizoCon.)

Jason S wrote:
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?

We all helped and coordinated a lot. This is probably because the first scenario is ruthlessly brutal; one player at our table and a few at other tables were trying it for the second (or more!) time, hoping to finally win it. After that, we learned some good cooperation pretty darned fast.

Jason S wrote:
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)?

No, we all worked well together about what locations each of us would be best at (and best at closing).

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

No, harvesting locations for loot doesn't seem particularly useful in OP, particularly once you know someone's already got a weapon 1 or item 1 you're looking for.

Jason S wrote:
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?

We had two Arabundis, which mean a lot of extra d4s on combat checks for everyone!

Jason S wrote:
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)?

Let me expand on my earlier response to say we had the following:

Tables 1 and 2: Enora (me), Kyra, Arabundi, Merisiel
Table 3 and 4: Enora (me), Kyra, Arabundi, Arabundi, Seoni

Jason S wrote:
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?

As your question is specifically about convention play, which I haven't done at those levels, I couldn't say.

Jason S wrote:
Was there anything else you were surprised by?

Yes, how much we had to just do ourselves (or were empowered to do by ourselves, you might say). We had a volunteer "run the box" at our first table, but he had to leave after that. He set up the second scenario, but I "ran the box" thereafter. I had a couple of questions at one point, but literally couldn't find any volunteers in the area to ask (although, as I mentioned above, the one time we had a pretty critical--like, win-or-lose-the-scenario-based-on-the-answer critical--question, Tanis happened to be there).

In all, though, I played with very pleasant, skilled people and would gladly play with any or all of them again.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
zeroth_hour wrote:
Yay, I get a Councilor's Ring! And Enora.

Are we going to have whole tables of Enoras with Councilor's Rings at PaizoCon, I wonder?

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

At the risk of a mere "I'm awesome" post, I did this last night with Heggal and won it on the first turn.

Only one location: Helm. Start there.

Starting hand includes a Farglass, Blessing of the Gods, and a couple other useful cards.

First turn, flip Blessing of Asmodeus onto the blessing discard pile.

Play the Farglass, note that the Hurricane Winds henchman is the second card down, move it to the top.

Encounter the Hurricane Winds and defeat it.

A Wisdom 29 check is required to close my location. Play the Blessing of the Gods as the Blessing of Asmodeus atop the blessings discard pile.

Bury hand. Close location. Win game.

I'm super skeptical of people's amazingly lucky play reports, so feel free to be skeptical of mine, but I found it pretty amazingly fortunate.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I really, really want it to be Iron Gods. But that's because I'd like to see my RPG chapter appear in the card game!

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

On the most recent earning's call, Hasbro's CEO acknowledged that its games were overall on an upswing, and singled out Dungeons and Dragons in particular as doing well.

In all, D&D sales probably contribute an amount not much more than a balance sheet rounding error to Hasbro, but the CEO calling it out seems a good sign for the game.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Any of them. Seriously.

I've run Rise of the Runelords as gestalt, and I'm just about through Shattered Star with gestalt.

Here's the sneaky trick of it: you control your PCs' leveling. If they are one or two levels behind the "recommended" levels for the adventure, the challenge level works itself out just fine.

For example, we started Into the Nightmare Rift (recommended for PCs of level 13) when they were still 11th level.

If you want to put a little bit of extra work into the world-building, you can do that: for example, I make a few of the NPCs that the PCs face (both opponents and allies) gestalt as well, so the PCs aren't the only ones out there.

Full disclosure: in my gestalt campaigns, I limit people to only two classes: no multiclassing or prestige classes. Archetypes for either or both classes are okay, though. In Shattered Star, I have:

* a magus/wizard
* a fighter/alchemist
* a fighter/monk
* a cleric/monk (zen archer, which is not really very monk-ish)
* a bard/oracle

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew L Klein wrote:
Any chance of this getting put up to DriveThru?

As TES mentions, there shouldn't be any proxying or new cards required at all to play this. That was part of my design--you already have all the cards you need to play.

I suppose you could have scenario cards, like LudwigO made, but I suspect there wouldn't be room on a regular card for these--some of the rules text and flavor text is really long, since I had a half-page rather than card-size to work with.

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Have you defeated Karzoug and want to keep playing?

The Mhar of Leng adventure is a five-scenario adventure scaled as a "Chapter 7" for the Rise of the Runelords PACG adventure path. It uses primarily the cards you've already got, with a handful of villains and henchmen you can print out from the .pdf, proxy, or order from DriveThruCards.com.

You can download it from WelbyBumpus.com here for free.

Get it, play it, and let me know what you think!

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hawkmoon269 wrote:
If you could be any ally in PACG, which ally would you be?

The RotRL ally Aldern Foxglove, because I just can't see anything bad ever happening to that guy (although I haven't played past Deck 1).

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just dropping a note here to mention that the printer-friendly version of Shield of Rannick is now also up at www.welbybumpus.com.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We, too, have breezed through AP 4 and 5 so far but hit a wall with this. We've lost it twice and it hasn't been close either time.

We will play it again, and play until we win it, but we'll definitely have to adopt the "spread out and temporarily close locations strategy" to beat it. We have Damiel, Jirelle, and Feiya, so we have limited scouting ability.

This scenario just feels like petulant meanness. It's difficult, but isn't a clever kind of difficult, like Bizarre Love Triangle, just an additive sort of meanness that seems a bit lazy in the design department:

"I've designed this well-crafted scenario about finally beating a nemesis of the PCs."

"Is it SUPER TOUGH? Did you use ALL the tough locations?"

"I could; I don't know if it matches the theme of..."

"DO IT! And y'know what would be tougher? Adding another location!"

"Sure, but you don't even know what the scenario is about..."

"Plus the ship is anchored, so they can't even use their ship powers!"

"But..."

"And a henchman that wipes a random character's hand! And one that makes you banish your most awesome cards! And make it so you have to fight THOSE SAME HENCHMEN OVER AND OVER."

"I suppose we could craft a story that..."

"FORGET STORY! FIGHT THE SAME TERRIBLE HENCHMEN OVER AND OVER FOR NO GOOD REASON! RANDOMLY!!"

"But..."

"Plus, you discard blessings from the blessing deck for fighting the villain. EVERY TIME you fight the villain!"

"That doesn't even make sense...losing blessing is like losing time. Does the villain delay you, or something? How does it fit into the story?"

"FORGET STORY! TOUGHEST LOCATIONS! EXTRA LOCATION! ANCHOR THE SHIP! KILLER HENCHMEN YOU FIGHT RANDOMLY OVER AND OVER FOR NO GOOD REASON! PLUS THE VILLAIN COSTS YOU TIME--AND MAKES YOU RECHARGE A CRAP-TON OF CARDS EVERY TIME, LIKE SOME SORT OF HOPPED-UP JUBRAYL VHISKI! DO IT!"

*sighs*

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I put my first skill feat into Wisdom, primarily to more reliably recharge my spells. I put the second into Strength, because I found myself in melee a lot.

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmmm, sounds like a good design challenge, though. I'll give this some thought, and see what I can come up with.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Keim wrote:
Scott Keim wrote:
This one actually happened to me: glanced at my cell phone and somehow my brain saw "You have 2 undead messages" instead of unread. Yeah, my creates typos.
And now I've lost my mind - I swear I typed my BRAIN creates typos.

The low-hanging joke here, of course, is that the undead took your brain...

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Myth Lord wrote:
That awesome Aurumvorax ripping through that robot should be my background from now on. Love that picture.

I loved seeing the art for The Choking Tower throughout, as it's a thrill to see my words come alive in art, but I particularly liked that aurumvorax image!

Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mike Selinker wrote:
We are discussing this.

Quick, everybody fill your decks with blessings from the blessing deck discard pile before they tell us not to!

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks to everyone for the thoughts and feedback here--I've uploaded a new version of Shield of Rannick to WelbyBumpus.com (you'll know it's the newest version because it has v2 in the file name).

In the new version, I've cleaned up some text, improved some of the story, and clarified the Sihedron Medallion rules in each scenario. This took a bit of doing, since what you do with the blessing deck is different based on what you're doing with the Sihedron Medallion.

* Banish or Display: you reveal the medallion, banish or display it, do the thing it makes you do, then advance the blessing deck.

* Shuffle: you reveal the medallion, do the thing it makes you do, then advance the blessings deck, then shuffle the medallion back in.

This is now set forth in each scenario, so should be clear--let me know if it's not!

For those interested in the gory details, here's one of the cases we went through in hammering this out:

Let's say you're playing 5A: Unearthing the Battlefield. You've done not so great, and your blessing deck has two medallions and two blessings in it. For your turn, you flip the medallion. You have to look at the "When the Sihedron Appears" section immediately and do what it says, so you make the check, then advance the blessings deck (say you flip a blessing), then shuffle the medallion back in. Now you've got one blessing and two medallions in your blessings deck.

At the beginning of the next turn, you flip a medallion so you again do the steps in "When the Sihedron Appears"--make the check, then advance the blessings deck--but you flip another medallion when you do. Since you've revealed a medallion, you immediately perform the "When the Sihedron Appears" step: make the check, then advance the blessings deck (flipping over the final blessing). Then "shuffle" both medallions back into the empty blessings deck. Your blessings deck now consists of two medallions, and that's it.

At the start of the next turn, you'll flip a medallion, make the check, then flip the other medallion and make the check, then try to advance the blessings deck again but fail to do so, immediately losing the scenario.

It's pretty rough when you get down that low but--and here was the important point for me--you're out of the infinite loop.

Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
ThreeEyedSloth wrote:
Still have my money on Jade Regent.

I want this to be Iron Gods, out of sheer vanity--I'd like to see my third chapter of that, The Choking Tower, made into an official card adventure!

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nohwear wrote:
I am thinking of joining the organized play. Which is the best character if I wanted to focus on allies?

Heggal, without a doubt. He really relies on allies, and has the ability to get several. Heggal is my favorite of the 4 or 5 OP characters I play. (As a useful aside, I also think he's the most powerful of the characters I play.)

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's an unrelated question (although it's about 0-3D Going Under, so this seems the right place to put it):

The villain makes you summon and encounter the Blackwater Charda henchman. The Blackwater Charda henchman is one of the henchmen shuffled into a location during setup, so might not be available.

The best we can tell, the aboleth's power is ignored as impossible if the Blackwater Charda hasn't been defeated and sent to the box; otherwise, it forces you to summon the Blackwater Charda as normal.

(This initially seemed an error to us, but upon reflection makes some balancing sense: if you encounter the aboleth early, it's combat difficulty is so high that it's something of a kindness that it's not able to throw the charda at you, too; by the time it can throw the charda at you, its combat difficulty will be more manageable.)

Contributor

4 people marked this as a favorite.

What do you do when you've gone through the entire Rise of the Runelords path for the PACG? Rearrange the cards and do it again!

The Shield of Rannick adventure path is an entirely new 30-scenario adventure path with an independent story. It uses only the cards from the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game: Rise of the Runelords Base Set and the six adventure decks--no need to print your own cards (but you will need all six adventure decks to play it).

You can download it from WelbyBumpus.com for free.

Get it, play it, and let me know what you think (and how I can improve it!).

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey, I've been looking into this in the past week or so.

I'm an RPG publisher. I'm quite familiar with the Pathfinder Compatibility License, as I use it for all my Run Amok Games products. Here is the obligatory plug for my highly-rated Pathfinder RPG games.

I had the good fortune to be accepted in the recent issue of Wayfinder, and that got me thinking a bit about the Community Use Policy, and how it differs from the Pathfinder Compatibility License. I'm quite amazed at just how much stuff--including oodles of art and even a few maps--that the CUP lets you use that the PCL does not. The key restriction within the CUP requirements is that you must not make any money from your product--essentially, you have to offer the product for free.

I'm down with that. I've freely shared some PACG scenarios before, and even (I claim) the very first fan-made scenario.

Specifically, I'm interested in rearranging all the cards from Rise of the Runelords to make a parallel adventure path, just the way OP is a "parallel adventure path" to S&S. You can see the similarities--there has to be, as the same cards are used--but it's a different story (in S&S OP, it's being captured by Jemma Redclaw and earning your freedom, rather than being press-ganged and having to overwhelm your captors).

I've gotten as far as laying out a structure for this RotR AP: the scope of each adventure, the villains and henchmen that I would use in each scenario, and so on.

My plan is to produce a .pdf. It'd be like the compilation of the OP scenarios, but all in one file. It would have one (or maybe two) scenarios per page. I'd be able to illustrate it fairly lavishly, because I'd be offering it for free under the CUP instead of under the PCL.

I still haven't yet done all my research for this; I've got several posts from the Homebrew forum still to review about releasing your own scenarios, and I still need to get a handle on just how much of a look I can use without violating the trade dress limitations of the CUP, for example. I also have a nagging suspicion that people over on the Board Game Geek forums are doing whole adventures and adventure paths left and right, but I'm rarely over there so I don't know. Plus I'm designing the whole thing.

But it'll be fun!

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

But punching everything and setting it on fire is our core competency! :-)

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mad Jack Deacon wrote:
I just have this image in my head of a bunch of local yokels easing out of the shadows to threaten my character who just reaches into a pouch, tosses out a handful of Caltrops, and runs off saying "So long suckers!"

You get ambushed by yokels? We keep getting ambushed by reefclaws, ogres, or other creatures that we have a hard time justifying why we might have blundered unwittingly into them. Unless they have levels of rogue, I suppose!

Worst is to get Ambushed by the Warlord--2 points less on each die rolled!

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Mistele wrote:
Congratulations, Ron, on the publication of this one! It's the big time! :D

I agree! I'm very honored, and looking forward to seeing what people think!

** Contributor

9 people marked this as a favorite.

I wanted to reiterate that this is a great opportunity to show Paizo what you've got. Be professional and serious about it, and you can go far. I submitted to a PFS open call in early 2011...and my first AP adventure is coming out this month.

Contributor

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I was lucky enough to be one of the playtesters of this game back in 2012. I made up my own scenario and shared it on the playtest forums on December 27, 2012 (and Mike liked it!). To my knowledge, this is the very first fan-made scenario for the game. I had to wait a bit to post it publicly, since it uses cards from Set 6, which wasn't out until recently. So here it is--the first fan-made PACG scenario ever!

Otherworldly Incursion
(appropriate for characters in the Chapter 3 - Chapter 4 range)

Lovecraftian horrors press in upon reality! Only by careful research and slowly collecting staunch allies and supernatural favor can the PCs hope to shut down the Leng Device and stop The Thing From Beyond Time before all hope is lost!

Players Locations
1 The Leng Device
1 Apothecary
1 Temple
2 Habe's Sanatorium
3 Village House
4 Waterfront
5 City Gate
6 Town Square

Villain: The Thing From Beyond Time
Henchmen: Leng Spiders

Rules:
Replace the rule text on The Leng Device with "You may not permanently close this location until all other locations have been permanently closed."

Every time you gain a blessing, put a marker on this card. Add the number of markers on this card to your checks to defeat Leng Spiders or The Thing From Beyond Time.

You may discard an ally to add 1d4 to any check against a Leng Spider or The Thing From Beyond Time, instead of that ally's usual effect.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dragon78 wrote:
Aberrations make sense to me. Though I would also like to see magical beast, fey, other evil outsiders(oni, azura, qlippoths), plant creatures, and proteans.

It's worth pointing out, for the purposes of this product thread, that many oni have the giant subtype.

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thunderspirit wrote:
Mike Mistele wrote:
All kidding aside, Ron is a fabulous writer, and a great guy. Congrats to him, and very much looking forward to seeing this AP!

And this.

Thanks much for the votes of confidence!

I'm ridiculously excited to be crashing onto the adventure path scene with this, and in such august company!

Contributor

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Adam Daigle wrote:


So, sound off, freelancers! Who's with me!?

I'm coming for my first PaizoCon ever!

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Martin wrote:
Lithovore wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:

I guess that the first thing they do is to dump any unsolicited material in the trash bin, likely without reading it. Sounds harsh, but the very last thing a publishing company wants is to have someone sue them over a manuscript/idea which was sent to them over 10 years ago and now by chance or by parallel design made its way into print.

I also have a devious plan in play. If for instance I got the ear (or eye as it were) of one of the staff, they might just ask about the alluded to idea and thus any info I divulged would, per definition, become solicited. "best evil laugh"

Enter RPG Superstar. Write for third party publishers. Write for Wayfinder.

If you want to be noticed or solicited, show you're worth being noticed or solicited.

To echo Liz--hey, it worked for me! :D

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I ran Rise of the Runelords with gestalt characters, and I'm deep into Shattered Star with gestalt characters as well.

I let my PCs play gestalt characters for two reasons: Primarily, it's to ensure that they have stamina to go longer in each adventuring day without a rest. I like that they can power through most dungeons with very few (or even zero) rests, without having to continually retreat in order to recover daily uses of rages/spells/channels, etc. Secondarily, it lets people play with combinations that wouldn't multi-class well, so we see fresh new things at the table. Sure, there are some power-munchkins that will play a fighter/monk for all the great feats, but I've currently got a witch/ranger (does witchy things but is a good hand in melee when necessary), a fighter/alchemist (a sword-and-board fighter with mutagens and more flexibility), and an oracle/bard that serves as a stellar party-buffer and knowledge guy.

My reasons don't include to fill gaps in the party (in both campaigns, I've had six players) or to jack up the power level (it's easy to just keep the PCs one or even two levels behind the suggested adventure level and it keeps the challenge appropriate for them).

1 to 50 of 80 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.