|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Tim Felts wrote:
I'm in the same boat--can't access the images, but I trust everyone else's judgment and I'm in for one as well!
Most of the Skinsaw Murders has a pretty gothic-horror feel to it. I would look at those cards/that story.
So I mentioned I'd be pulling a RotRL variant AP together, and I'm a week or two away from having a rough cut of this--anyone who wants to take a look at that for comment/criticism, or to help with playtesting it, please send me a Private Message with your email address.
Pluvia, perhaps the concern is that characters today can pretty quickly get to being "the best they can be" with the class decks; I know that I've often elected to forego any reward at all, because literally nothing available would improve my deck.
Multiclassing removes that, making the "best they can be" something that is a bit more powerful.
I don't think that's a bad thing at all, but I think that it does make characters more powerful. Not, however, "extremely powerful."
I agree, but the ability to use all the RotR cards to create post-RotR content would be very difficult without some patently arbitrary rules (like "add 10 to the difficulty of every monster").
I'm talking about doing the latter; you'd start it over again.
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.
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!
Your wall of text is intimidating, but the above is the crux of your proposal. I think it amps up power for Adventure 3 and later, but that's just a matter of designing the OP adventures to be a little bit harder, maybe. I'd use it, or more accurately, test it.
It takes all sorts, I suppose, but I'm disagreeing with you on a few fronts:
For me, the game is absolutely sustainable. We've played literally hundreds of games of PACG, and with the organized play options, it's basically doubled the lifespan of the Skull and Shackles game. We've played the entirely of S&S in the playtest, yet we're still excited for more standard S&S, more organized play of S&S, the final incarnation of Wrath of the Righteous, and the inevitable organized play of WotR.
I don't know that new character decks will be necessary to enjoy Wrath of the Righteous--WotR will include its own characters with some very cool options and will have plenty of new stuff all on its own. That said, I agree that I'd like to see the class decks for the "missing" classes like the druid, monk, etc. I'm sure those are an eventuality--I hope they take some lessons from the last class decks into account and include only 3 characters, rather than 4, per deck.
Linking to the Pathfinder Society is unnecessary and irrelevant for us. We're big fans of the RPG, but none of us really play Pathfinder Society any more--I can't see that any connection between the two will be something any of us use.
So I'm at the other end of the spectrum, personally, but I'd like to hear what others think.
Dave Riley wrote:
I don't sleeve, so I'm able to use the box insert as Vic and God intended. One thing I do lack, however, is a place to put removed Basics/Elites--for that one thing alone, I need a separate box (I put the minis we use instead of tokens, dice, and my scenario tracker paperwork all in the big compartment at the back of the box, so the removed cards can't effectively go there).
We were a little dismayed that our finely-tuned decks of weapons, monster-killing spells, and armors were rendered entirely useless by this scenario, in which you fight precisely one monster (the villain). By the rules, I think that even the monsters that a location summons--such as Hammerhead Sharks at Shark Island--would turn into random ships.
And those ain't easy ships; some of them have really high checks. (As a piece of trivia you may not know, all of those new ships are the ones featured in the recent release Ships of the Inner Sea.)
We won it our first time through, but only by realizing early on that weapons and most spells are just garbage in our hands. We discarded for blessings and useful allies, helped each other's checks much more than we usually do (Foxes were popular), and were more aggressive than usual about healing. Luck played a large role--when my Vika hit a ship, it often ended up being the Kraken's Spite, which allows Strength/Melee to beat (yay!).
FYI, our group is Vika, Tarlin, and Meliski.
Dave Riley wrote:
You play Damiel and Jirelle, but Damiel is the one with Besmara's Tricorne? Our Jirelle wouldn't dream of letting it go!
(We play Damiel, Jirelle, and my Feiya.)
Orbis Orboros wrote:
I would say, and this is all just my opinion, mind you, that *all* Damiels should take 2x Tot Flask, 1+ Potion of Heroism, 1+ Potion of Flying, and just one Potion of Healing.
I think this is just what our Damiel has, with a Noxious Bomb instead of the Potion of Flying (partly because he likes having the "go big" combat number, but mostly because we haven't found a Potion of Flying yet).
I'm planning on taking the 1d4+X with my Heggal as high as I can; it's such a powerful ability that maximizing it first seems sensible.
I've found that I cure just as often with allies* using Heggal as with my Cure spell, so the bonus to recharge doesn't seem particularly useful.
* A second ally in my hand, of course, rather than the one I'm using for all the d4+x.
We're replaying Chapter 1 to get a friend of ours into the game. I wanted to post here just to say RIP Arabundi...
So Radillo, Siwar, Valendron, and Arabundi teamed up for this one. (Arabundi is me, and, no, I don't know why a mage-hating ranger has teamed up with three arcane casters!)
We played Nature's Wrath once that evening, and got pretty well hammered by it. We'd hit a lot of hard barriers at the Fringes of the Eye; Siwar thought she could close those barriers quickly (with her Diplomacy-to-close-barriers rule, and a Potion of Glibness to boot), but we kept hitting deck-crippling barriers like the Harpoon Trap and Drowning Spikes. We hardly met any other henchmen in the other locations, and when time ran out we still had 3 locations open and no idea where the Brinebrood Queen had run off to.
So we played it again. This time things went much better! Despite shuffling Hirgy into Pinnacle Atoll, and encountering him once, that location closed quickly. The Fringes of the Eye that had given us such trouble the first time around also went quickly. We'd ended with only the Jungle (*always* last or second-to-last if possible!) and the Sea Caves left. We didn't think we'd have trouble at either--even the Sea Caves with its check-at-the-start-of-your-turn-or-bury-a-card rule. Keep in mind we have the Valendron Bus, which ferries us all away from a dangerous location at the end of his turn. Plenty of time on the blessing deck, and victory in sight.
So my Arabundi had taken a beating and used his cures to heal others. No problem, though, as I still had 6 cards left in my deck, so I could survive a total hand wipe if necessary. I had only two cards in hand, having helped out others with blessings and the "crossbow shot from afar" to aid combat checks. Off to the Sea Caves, where I found--a Botfly Swarm! My only two cards were two piercing weapons, neither of which can be used at all against the swarm. Everyone else was out of blessings and Foxes, so I couldn't succeed at the Wisdom 12 check at all. So, failure. No problem, though, I'd counted on that: I still had 6 cards in my deck.
Then I read that the Botfly Swarms cause you to discard the top card of your deck if you fail--and then I couldn't draw up to 6.
RIP, Arabundi, you're in a happier place now away from all those mages...
Anonymous The Spy wrote:
I have a notebook I keep this information in, but I only log "Blessing B", "Item 1", or similar. If you'd played any game with me, I'd be able to tell you whether you took a Weapon 1, but I couldn't tell you that you took, say, a +1 boarding pike.
Someone can tell me if I'm doing this wrong, but I only list the same information on my log sheets--"item B" rather than "spyglass", for example.
Even that amount of information is more than the site requires, as it only asks for the card type ("item", for example, rather than "item 1").
Heggal seems to be one of the most powerful Organized Play characters, because he has a similar ability. Of the six or so OP characters I've played, he certainly seems to be my strongest.
Theryon Stormrune wrote:
That's precisely the type of flag I'm getting--but it seemed like an error to me rather than an informative note. It didn't stop me from reporting the event, or invalidated the table, or anything, so it doesn't seem to impact my reporting--I just thought it didn't need to be there, because it was flagging something that is entirely permissible.
Full speed ahead from me, then! (I have to say that I'm piling up with the star rating by organizing these--I'll be a four-star GM by Christmas!)
I've registered my three characters just as you describe (except that my number is 1711, not 1234567) :-)
We're going to be playing a lot of Chapter 2 this weekend with different characters, and I'll confirm what I'm seeing with screenshots, etc.
Hello! I'm playing a lot of the organized play: Heggal when it's just my wife and me playing, Vika when our roommate can play as well, and Lesath whenever others can join in. I've played most of the scenarios two or three times each.
I'm responsible for reporting all of our sessions, so everyone's used to my note-taking at the end of each scenario.
When I report a scenario that has been played by the same player, but with a different character, the reporting system shows an error, stating that the player has already played that scenario. That's true; the player has indeed already played it; but the character hasn't. So there shouldn't be an error at all.
In fact, because replaying is allowed (although you can only take the scenario reward once with each character), the only error that ought to trigger is when I check the "take reward" box for a character that has already played that same scenario and checked the "take reward" box--all other play should be acceptable.
I don't know if this is something that is even on IT's radar, as it seems low in priority, but I wanted to see whether there was a fix for this in the works (and, importantly, if I should hold off on reporting until it's fixed!).
In case any designers are monitoring this out of curiosity--we, too, use the "dibs" rule. We only put out onto the table the items we don't intend to include in our decks.
We sometimes change our mind when we see what other people are throwing out.
"Hey, I was going to keep my Codex, but are you sure you want to toss that Spyglass? If so, I'll take it--anyone want a Codex?"
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!
gavin kerr wrote:
Have you posted these home-brew characters anywhere? I'd like to see them!
Seltyiel is probably a great candidate for a "multi-class" deck, allowing some specific combination of the Fighter and Wizard decks.
Andrew Klein wrote:
I'm using a three-ring binder with clear pockets to hold all the printed scenarios, as well as all our chronicle sheets (I hold on to those for myself, my wife, and a couple of our friends). It has the advantage of being expandable to include later adventures; ultimately, I'll have all of Season 0 in one binder, then I'll start another for Season 1!
I'm afraid people who played at GenCon and then back in their home country might have you beat on that score.
I'm in Chicago, and I've only played home versions of the PACG so far--where in the area are you planning to play? Pastimes? Chicagoland Games? Games Plus?
Tanis O'Connor wrote:
Does this seem fun to you?
No, which is why I want to fix it!
Right now, I'm leaning toward the "if you don't explore, bury a card" fix as probably the most straightforward solution here.
(Although my less-fun way means no confusion about what to do with the other villains, which others have raised in this thread.)
Andrew Klein wrote:
21 post-increase, and you have a point on the boons--you only get two with the two-roll method (the initial plunder card and the award from beating her ship).
We're going to be playing the Treasure of Jemma Redclaw tomorrow, and it seems that it's likely to be the easiest scenario we've ever faced--requiring only two rolls.
Hey, we've all been there: you know right where the villain is, there's nowhere for the villain to escape to, and plenty of time left on the timer: so you sit out a few turns, discarding and drawing to get the perfect hands around the table, then someone steps up to paste the villain with a combat check in the 30s or 40s.
This scenario sets you up with that from the very start.
We can sit around the table, and count out who's going to be take the 20th turn (or 19th, with the Tower as a location). Then we don't explore, just ready our hands. The villain-killer gets her best weapon in her hand, a few blessings (preferably those that help with the attack or with the Wisdom/Survival check against the Shackles Pirate Ship), and one extra card to recharge when Jemma pops up.
Everyone else does the same: discard and draw until we have a pair of blessings, perhaps with helpful spells (like Strength or Speed) or other cards.
We position ourselves appropriately (to throw Lem-like or Harsk-like benefits), and if the villain-killer will be using the Swashbuckling trait against Jemma, then she heads to the Festhall for the extra d4.
Then, we wait for the 20th turn...
Jemma pops out on the villain-killer's turn. Recharge a card, make the check against the Shackles Pirate Ship (easy with blessing contributed around the table) then make the combat check of 21 (again, easy with blessings contributed around the table).
Scenario won with two rolls.
In a normal game, this strategy probably wouldn't be very appealing, since everyone would be missing out on some sweet boons in the location decks--but in Guild play, everyone's only going to get one deck upgrade anyway.
I"m thinking on how to improve this, but I've been generally leery of "card hiding in the blessing deck" setups for a while now (ever since trying to design a few like that, actually) and I wonder if that's a fundamental problem here. Thoughts?
I'm Ron! And I thought you could seize any ol' ship you encounter, unless it specifically says you can't seize it--but now I know better. (And in response to the question "What happens when you encounter the Deathknell when you're on the Deathknell"--the rules cover that; you just pretend to have a duplicate card.)
Yes, sounds like a legitimate way to trigger the loss and avoid death.
Of course, if the group had already encountered Whalebone Pilk and seized the Deathknell, she could avoid being dead in an entirely different way...
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!
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.
Thanks for the great words, Mark!
Robot clockwork mage, indeed! Also, the red on Redfang's mouth isn't blood--it's just due to bad life choices. :-)
I love seeing the art that brings everything to life!
I'm going to be a month behind, because I'm playing at home and not at a store. I'm assuming the process for this will be like the Pathfinder Society, but I don't actually know for sure. I'm wondering how, mechanically, I will get the scenarios.
Will there be a .pdf I can purchase just like a Pathfinder Society Scenario?
How much will those cost?
Will there be a subscription model so I can get them all?
Will the first set of scenarios one be available on or about November 1st, a month after the store release on October 1st?
I play very regularly with my wife and our housemate. We play two to three evenings a week for three hours or so, and we get through one or two scenarios each time (rarely, three scenarios).
About a third of the time, we incorporate a fourth person--usually a houseguest and not someone that's specifically come up to play the game with us. This tends to increase our play time to three and a half hours or so.
I just caught this list; thanks for compiling it!
Is there a meta-meta-list? Do I get an award for having a scenario in top 20, in bottom 10, and in most polarizing (and for being a most polarizing author?). Yay, I'm...famous?
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!
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!
Villain: The Thing From Beyond Time
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.
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.
We played this with our post-level 5 characters, and found it a little awkward, and not particularly hard.
I see what you're doing with the design: by seeding everything with henchmen that don't allow you to close the location, you make people run down decks. This doesn't work in practice, though, because you have so many villains, and defeating a villain allows you to close a location automatically (and without the difficult checks that some of these have!) while the villain runs off. The exception is if there is another villain in that stack, of course, but then you know just where a villain is, and whether he's the only villain left, and can pick the best character to go beat him.
So ultimately you'll end up having all the villains run to the Runeforge Hub, which you must visit last, and defeat all the villains there one at a time.
It seems you could just start by seeding all those villains in the Runeforge Hub, and put normal (if tough) henchmen in the locations as normal. Or you could use the henchmen you've picked, instead, and that makes everyone have to drill through all the locations all the way to the bottom of each--which might run you out of time more often than not.
Anyway, we had a reasonably good time--my Seelah must have faced Mammy Graul about four times, leading the other players to comment that Seelah and Mammy might have something going on on the side--but it just seemed like you could more easily arrive at what you're going for here.
Thanks for setting this out!
Isn't it much more usual for the GM to make those rolls for the player in secret? I've done that plenty of times:
Player: "Do I think he's lying?"
I haven't actually done the template application, and I acknowledge that my response would be more complete if I had, but regardless:
Apply both templates, then compare the final stats to the "Monster Creation" table in the Bestiary. Whatever it's closest to is the CR it ought to be.
The strict math of templates creates wonky situations (e.g., young spectres) and a reasonable check against the Monster Creation chart allows for a more accurate assessment of final CR.
The NPC wrote:
Is it just me or were they putting a little extra effort in trying to sell Rahadoum as a neutral nation?
They have to be presented as neutral. It's one of the Laws of Man. :)
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!
Resounding yes. We have played PACG more than 100 games and it's still our "go to" board game.
We played the entire AP from beginning to end during the playtest. We've played up through adventure 3 in the current set, and since we had a fairly spectacular death, we've started over (Lem's former player with a new character, the others of us making "backup" characters), and we're in the middle of adventure 2 as of tonight's game.
On top of this, we've played the Perils of the Lost Coast three-scenario adventure about a bjillion times to show off the game to other people.