Inception is in HBO's rotation these days, and is one of those movies that must be watched when encountered. As such, I've watched various parts of it 2-3 times in the past week or so. The last time I watched it, I noticed a line from Arthur to Ariadne explaining the function of the totems, which boiled down to:
"The totem let's you know if you are in someone else's dream."
Note what the line does not say: The totem does not indicate whether you are in your own dream.
This also explains why it's so important that no one else touch your totem - much like Saito's carpet in the initial sequence, the details of the totem are impossible for a third party dreamer to simulate. This obviously breaks down if the totem is handled by a third party, because that experience would allow them to recreate the totem in the dream world.
Now, granted, Leo later makes the broader statement alluded to above (the totem indicates whether you are in any dream), but, my assertion is that Leo is wrong because he has "forgotten something he once knew," i.e., that the totem only tells you if you are in someone else's dream, not your own. Whether or not Leo's totem stops spinning is irrelevant if he is in his own dream - he knows how long it typically spins before falling, as does his subconcious, and the top actually reinforces the false belief that he is awake rather than exposing the truth.
Mind you, I don't think the above is any type of definitive proof that the entire/most of the movie is in Leo's dreams (Nolin's gone out of his way to say the movie is ambiguous, and to cut it so as to be ambiguous, so anyone who claims to be able to defintively prove it one way or the other is full of s#*&), but that line reinforced my conclusion that Leo is in a dream during most of the movie.
I'm sure the following doesn't work or make sense for a variety of reasons, but I thought I'd toss the thought out there anyway...
One option that would be interesting is the ability to be the GM in the Pathfinder MMO. Obviously, this couldn't be the same as being a real GM due to the inherent griefer potential and undesirability of granting god-like powers to some random player, but within certain constraints, perhaps it could work.
As an example, suppose the newb area has a goblin tribe nearby. Typically, these would be scripted/AI controlled monsters. The tribe itself would be static - each time a player comes, the same goblins are there to kill upon respawn, they have the same tactics, and nothing changes.
So, suppose that the GM player controls the goblin tribe. He plays a game that is more akin to a RTS, sending out the goblins to gather treasure and expand the goblin village. When adventurers attack, he rounds up the nearest goblins and sends them off to fight. If the goblins win, they level up a little, and potentially steal the PCs gear. This makes the goblins slightly tougher and more challenging, provides a little more thrust behind random encounters (PCs encounter goblins because the goblin player is sending them off to find worg puppies, for example), and provides for a style of PVP that's a little more abstract and less personal than the typical MMO.
It could be expanded further into module type content. Imagine entering an instance with a GM (who must be approved by the players entering such instance) based upon a module. The GM sees the entire dungeon from the perspective of the monsters and antagonists. If the players talk to an NPC, the GM chooses among the dialogue tree options available to that NPC. The encounter can still be resolved, but it's more dynamic now that there's another human on the other end.
I realize there are a number of problems with this even at the theoretical level - it basically requires programming a second game (the RTS) on top of the first game, would need to be monitored closely for the potential grief abuse, and the number of players who could be a GM is inherently finite outside of instances (how many goblin tribes can possibly be located by the newb area?), but, given as how I'm a super expert on all things MMO by virtue of posting here, I thought I'd run it up the flagpole anyway.
Last night, I ran a solo game in which the PC (a 10th level barbarian) managed to become infected with lycanthropy through an amazing series of bad rolls (including rolling a 1 on a Fortitude save, which was the only way he could've failed it). On top of that, the PC challenged the leader of the werewolf pack for leadership, defeated the werewolf, and ate his heart (which the werewolves generally acknowledge as the appropriate way to take leadership of the tribes).
I want to play by RAW as much as possible, but this has such interesting story potential that it would be awesome to see it play out. By RAW, lycanthropy is not that difficult for a 10th level character to fix (assuming he can find a 12th level cleric to cast heal/remove disease). Also by RAW, the PC should go into a murderous rage each full moon and should be an NPC. Clearly, if I want to enable the PC to continue as a werewolf, I'm going to need to bend/break RAW, and I was hoping to get the thoughts of you fine folks on the most interesting/least broken way of doing that.
My current thinking is to have lycanthropy start out as the by the book version (PC loses control on the night of a full moon), and then provide the PC with a path to gain control of it. Mechanically, my thought would be to treat the abilities he's gained in a similar way to level adjustments - he's effectively gained x ECL's from contracting lycanthropy. However, to gain control of it, he would need to spend xp to remove the ECL's (using an optional rule from the 3.5 PHBII).
Any thoughts/advice/suggestions would be much appreciated. (Arguments about how I'm doing it wrong and ruining the game for everyone else, not so much.)
I finally got around to flipping through my big box of Paizo goodies and was much pleased with this month's offerings. Particularly Jade Regeant, which, despite my misgivings on Asian flavor, looks really great.
But, I wanted to give a special shout-out to the new format features in the book. The short summary at the beginning of the chapter along with the various level progressions is a wonderful addition. I am constantly hunting for that type of information, and having it so easily accessible is nice.
Second, the magic items broken out into their own section is also a nice touch. It makes it much easier to find a unique item from an adventure without hunting through it trying to remember where the item is to be found. Plus, it makes it easier to use them outside of the particular AP in which they appear. Again, a nice upgrade in usability.
Finally, the real showstopper - the layered pdf maps! Maps with the DM information removed has been on my wish list forever, and having it in this format is great.
A wordier version of +1 for those who aren't into the whole brevity thing...:
I am the biggest dominion addict these days. If you haven't played it, I recommend giving it a try. Games take 20-40 minutes and it is easy to pick up.* It scratches a similar itch as magic in a lot of ways, but is faster and friendlier.
This expansion is good (it's been available for play on the unofficial browser version for a few weeks), and has a standout card similar to goons and city - tournament. It lets you gain very powerful prize cards by revealing a province in hand. There are only five prizes total (they don't count as a pile for ending the game), and include things like the princess (bridge, but lowers costs by $2) and trusty steed (choose two: +2 actions, +2 cards, +$2, gain four silvers and put them on top of your deck).
*The base set is the best place to start. This is an expansion, and I don't think it includes the coin or victory point cards, which are needed for play.
Am I the only one who would like to have a single volume for each base class in the pathfinder campaign setting line? Something the size of the racial books would be ideal. With APG, UM, and UC coming out, I find myself referencing 2-4 books for all of the rules on any particular character class. I'd love to have a single book with all the rules for, say, the barbarian, which includes all the archetypes from the APG, UM, and UC, the various favored class bonuses for the barbarian, and maybe a barbarian-centric character sheet at the end.
If it could be kept under $15, it seems like it would be a great thing for a player to buy (particularly a player who only has the core rules and isn't interested in purchasing the other hardcovers).
I realize that there's a significant contingent of gamers who balk at ever paying for any type of reprint, but to me, the portability of a single volume, the ease of use for a new player, and a low price point would make such a product more than worth it.
Currently, I print out the pages from my various Paizo product pdfs for the class I am playing and assemble them in a three ring binder. It's ugly, it's inconvenient, and poorly organized. I'd love to have a better option, and would pay accordingly.
I'm finally getting a chance to play some PFRPG and am tossing around the idea of a barbarian/alchemist focused on mutagens and rage. I'm hoping you fine folks might help me with some questions, such as...
Will my barbarian rage stat bumps stack with my mutagen stat bumps?
If I take the fied totem, lesser barbarian rage power and grow horns, will that be a primary attack even if I attack with claws and bite from feral mutagen? Here's the text of the ability:
Fiend Totem, Lesser (Su): While raging, the barbarian grows
a pair of large horns, gaining a gore attack. This attack is a
primary attack (unless she is also attacking with weapons,
in which case it is a secondary attack) and is made at the
barbarian’s full base attack bonus (–5 if it is a secondary
attack). The gore attack deals 1d8 points of piercing damage
(1d6 if Small) plus the barbarian’s Strength modifier (1/2 if it
is a secondary attack).
I just noticed that the iconic party in the art for Carrion Crown consists entirely of female iconics. I think RoTRL was 75% female, but am I correct that this is the first ladies only adventuring party in a Paizo AP?
In any event, I wanted to give out a +1 to you good folks at Paizo. I remember back when the iconics were being announced that it was mentioned that having half of them be female would enable Paizo to have an AP in the future that featured an all female party, and here it is.
For some reason, at that time the idea of a ladies only party seemed...I don't want to say strange, but definitely novel and atypical. Now that it's here, I almost didn't notice it because I was so used to seeing these characters kick ass and take names; their gender is entirely besides the point. The Carrion Crown party doesn't feel like a gimmick, it feels like a part of the identity of the game. The fact that Paizo has refreshed the adventuring party in such a subtle way and made it feel like it's always been that way is gratifying.
Sorry if there's already an answer to this, but what is the mechanical incentive to expand the kingdom? My group claimed two hexes, drove their consumption to zero, and have spent almost 3 years in-game building their capital city. They don't see any point claiming additional hexes because doing so would increase their command DC an not provide any significant benefits. Are we missing something?
Having a discussion with a player about whether or not minor items can be sold out of a slot if they are less than 4k gps. He's been pointing to the fact that there are different DCs for a sale based on whether the item is minor/moderate/major items. I think that's meant to cover those minor items that are worth more than 4k.
I'm pretty sure this has been answered before, but can't seem to find the thread. Any help would be appreciated.
This thread is for the many posters on the board who are faithful (and willing to share their faith) to describe how they found their faith, the difference it has made in their lives, or any similar stories about how they, individually, have been bettered by such faith.
My hope is threefold:
1. That this thread will be a welcome and warming counterpoint to the various religious threads on the boards.
2. That explaining faith through personal stories will grant those of us lacking faith with a better understanding of what it means and avoid getting bogged down in arguments about historicity and such.
3. That a thread like this, which emphasizes the positive in faith, will do more to foster mutual understanding among the community than tighter moderation of the other religious threads.
I consider many of you to be friends, and hope this helps you find that you are not alone in this community. I sincerely look forward to your stories.
Who knows, maybe I'll be sufficiently moved to abandon the dark side...
I didn't want to clog up the judges feedback thread, so I thought I'd create a place to say thank you for providing the judge's comments.
Thank you.
Edit: and, now that I'm not rushing to finish typing to answer the phone, let me add that I value the feedback you provided and appreciate the level of thought that went into judging my item. What's always insightful about contests like this (or even the submission process for Dragon/Dungeon) is how much harder it is to do this for a living than it looks.
Interesting tidbit to run through the usual set of debate/qualifiers (e.g., does not include online revenue, sources may not be accurate, etc.), but, still, our good friend and RPG Superstar Judge casually dropped the following bomb in his ENWorld column:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
But there is a silver lining in every cloud. Pathfinder from Paizo couldn’t exist without the OGL and the D20 System Reference Document. And according to my industry sources, it’s outselling Dungeons & Dragons a feat (no pun intended) I would have considered almost impossible 10 years ago. Furthermore the older generation of tabletop RPG players have been asserting their own passion through the “Old School Renaissance”, essentially rebuilding a very frayed social network around a particular style of play that the industry hasn’t well served for nearly 25 years using the OGL and the various Reference Documents to reverse engineer games in the style of the 70’s and early 80s.
I just downloaded Game Dev Story for my iPhone and am having the hardest time putting it down. It's a simulation/resource management type game that puts you in the role of a small company developing video games. You get to choose the type of game you create (e.g., I've been making Robot Puzzle games lately), hire and level-up employees, etc. As you play, new consoles are released (e.g., the Intendro Game Kid) and you can develop new games for those.
I probably make this joke at every single session when the PCs approach any potential confrontation by charging in and fighting. I try to build encounters that can be resolved (or at least made easier) through non-combat efforts or good tactics, and sometimes my players go that route, but not that often.
That got me to thinking - not about what I can do to force them to play this way, but how I can approach it more from their perspective. My usual rule of thumb is that if the players come up with a clever plan, I will try to accommodate it even if it deviates from my thoughts on how the session might play out.
To flip this on its head, I'd like to hear what you, the wonderful Paizo community, have found most facilitates planning and strategic combat when you are not behind the DM's screen. What has your DM done to provide opportunities to use brains over brawn? What plan do you always dream of executing, but can never find the right scenario to put it in place?
Is it just me, or do most parties insist on killing every single solitary creature, down to the last CR 1/2 monster, in combat?
I don't award xp solely for killing things (I give partial to full xp if the foe is driven off but will come back, and full xp if the foe will never return), so I don't think the incentives are wrong.
From a player perspective, I understand the logic - even a weak and pitiful fleeing minion can alert other creatures to the party and make their lives miserable.
But, my god, it is the most boring, game grinding to a halt element in our combats and I don't know what to do to make it stop. I suppose I could always hold back some nasty critter and have it pounce on the lone persuing PC, but that doesn't really address my major problems (see below). I frequently just say "okay, fine, you chase it and kill it after a few rounds," which solves the problem in that instance, but isn't always the best solution. I could have the monsters never flee, but that strikes me as pretty stupid for most creatures.
Here's why I hate it::
1. It usually involves going off the map. This is really a logistical challenge. When the PCs (or the foe) ends up off the current board, I often need to rearrange tactiles, redraw the map, and generally spend an inordinate amount of time for a foe that only has a small handful of hp and will be taken out with a single shot.
2. It's at the end of combat, when combat (and frequently the session) is winding down. It cuts short the thrill of victory and replaces it with extra pointless grinding.
3. It rarely accomplishes anything. The fleeing foe was defeated, hunting it down and killing it doesn't do anything.
4. It leaves most players bored. There are usually only 1-2 PCs with the speed and proximity to chase a foe. Everyone else just sits around, waiting for more of the map to be drawn so that the poor creature can be put out of its misery.
By way of background, here's what inspired the post::
The PCs spotted a single member of a boggard patrol in the water, about 50' from shore. They opened fire, and it fled, along with the rest of its companions. The druid wildshaped into a giant octopus to pursue, the summoner started spamming dolphins. Combat moved about 150' from the shore. A 1 hour battle ensued which managed to touch upon a ton of complicated rules elements (underwater combat, wildshaping damage, grappling, poison, concealment from an ink cloud). One player was involved (and, as an octopus, had 9 attacks to resolve each turn). The patrol that he went after consisted of a half dozen regular boggards and a ranger. The game came grinding to a halt for everyone else and generally sucked.
I don't lay this at the feet of my players - I think what they are doing in launching pursuit is probably a good strategy. I just want it to suck less, or have some faster way to resolve it, or a suggestion for a trap or monster that I can spring on the pursuing PC to guarantee a fast death that underlines the truism of "never split the party."
Okay, the last one is just frustration speaking, but that's probably where I will go next if I can't think of anything better.
The Paizo message boards allow for dice rolling. If you want to take an action away from the table, briefly describe what you are doing, provide the modifier (e.g., knowledge:arcana +6 ), and use the dice roller.
The tags for dice rolling below, but you should also be able to see it if you reply to this post.
The dice aren't rerolled when you edit a post. You have one hour after posting to edit.
Spoiler tags are useful if you want to pass private information.
Sonlen Party:
Make a Fort check to avoid a hangover, DC 10 + number of pints consumed.
Fort Save (-5)
1d20 - 5 ⇒ (17) - 5 = 12
Thaddeus Party:
I will put the results of the knowledge regarding lycanthropy in one of these.
I just learned that my original undergrad institution (Oberlin College, go...uh...ruskies? The Flying Stalins? The Armpit Weasels?), for which I never had great love, has added a new themed hall. When I attended, the theme halls were devoted to various fringe politic/sexual identity/ethnic groups - which amounts to a whole lotta nothing for a non-communist straight white male.
Today, I randomly find a link indicating that they now have a Sci-Fi Hall. It's even located in my former dorm!
Bastards! Where was that option 15 years ago when I was just trying to find living space without group showers, naked sing-alongs, and vegan food?
Oh well, I guess the moral of the story is that I should've just gone to an engineering school, where I understand all of the dorms were (and are) effectively sci-fi halls.
Here's a new thread for people to debate the "merits" of ninjas, samurai, and katanas, including a discussion of whether they even can be adequately and accurately expressed using PFRPG and human language (I personally think that the only way to really display the full awesomeoness of the concepts is with interpretive dance in front of a blue screen filled with robots).
Go wild. Go crazy. Just go away from the Ultimate Combat thread.
My players are really digging Kingmaker and Pathfinder in general. Every time we game, I have a stack of books from my various subscriptions and talk about all the great products Paizo makes. I'd like to point them to a subscription that would be appropriate for them, but I don't think the Companion line is quite on point - a lot of it is campaign specific, and most of that doesn't relate to the area where the campaign is set. Any suggestions?
I've gotten a handful of Paizo map packs, but have a game tomorrow afternoon and was hoping to find something a little more generic that I could print up. Anyone have any suggestions? I'm not looking for anything too complicated, just, say, a 10x10 card with a grid and some forest terrain on it.
I'm curious about this. I understand why you need to lock in the favored class itself at 1st level, but why can't you change the benefit from level to level (e.g., pick extra hp the first few levels, then switch to extra skill point thereafter)? Is this just to make it easier to verify if a character was properly built?
Now that PaizoCon 2010 is over, it's time to start planning for PaizoCon 2011. And that means those of you who couldn't make it this year had better start saving up and blocking out time to make it to 2011.
In particular, everyone's favorite warwoof was greatly missed. Be on notice Heathy, you will be drafted into attending next year.
I want to confirm that I am running Improved Grab/Grapple correctly, and would appreciate if anyone can chime in on whether the following is correct.
Let's use an owlbear (a larger creature with improved grab) attacking a medium creature. The way I read the rules, the owlbear makes a claw attack (+8 to hit) and does 1d6+4 damage. Then, it immediately makes a grapple check (+14 CMB) against its opponent's CMD. If it succeeds, the opponent is grappled. Once it enters a grapple, the owlbear's attack action ends (so, if the second claw attack hits, the grapple is initiated and the bite attack is not resolved).
Once in the grapple, the owlbear can either make a grapple check to inflict its claw damage (using its CMB against the opponent's CMD) or it can take a full attack action (Using the attack bonus associated with the attack and with a -2 penalty for being in a grapple) to attempt to claw/claw/bite.
Does anyone have a simple blank map for the Greenbelt? I'm not talking about a copyright infringing version of the official map, but a basic hex map with colors corresponding to the terrain types.
Is it possible to steal from a hostile opponent under RAW?
Here's the scenario I'm considering. The party will be encountering some goblins. The goblins realize that their chances against a party of 6 mounted PCs are pretty low, so their tactics are going to focus on (a) injuring their mounts and (b) stealing whatever they can get their hands on.
Sleight of Hand would seem the obvious choice, but it specifically states that it can't be used against an opponent that is aware of the creature doing the stealing.
The only other rules that seem on point are disarm. Would it be a disaster if I used those rules (including provoking an AoO) to model stealing?
This is a bit of a scattershot post, but I've been considering a success based system for D&D and don't have my thoughts well-organized. If anyone has any thoughts, comments, criticisms, etc., I would be glad to hear them:
Scavenging for Value: The party has just finished killing an ogre in his lair. Junk is scattered all over the room, some of which is obviously valuable (coins, gems, etc) and some of which is likely to be worthless junk. Appraise is used to identify the most valuable items to determine how much can be scavenged and resold. Make an Appraise check, DC 10. On a failure, the party finds nothing of value in the junk. For every 5 points over DC 10 (a success), the party finds 3d6 x ranks in Appraise in gear that can be scavenged and resold. So, if the result of the Appraise check was 27, that would be 4 successes, and the total value of the treasure would be 12d6 x ranks in appraise.
I would likely use this in other instances of resource harvesting in the campaign. So...
Fur trapping: Survival check, DC 10, each success yields 3d6 x ranks in Survival in gp.
Mapping: Profession: Cartographer or Knowledge: Geography, DC 10, each success yields a map worth 3d6 x ranks in the skill used in gp. If character is trained in both skills, that adds an extra success automatically.
Etc...
The gp value and DC may vary, but the basic concept remains the same: the better you do on the roll, the more you are able to harvest. If you have a complimentary skill it adds an extra success. Assists would still just add +2 to the roll as normal.
Does anyone know if there's a d20 inventory management program that looks/works like the inventory management system in games like Diablo, where the various containers are represented by boxes and each piece of equipment takes up so many boxes? I can fudge it using graph paper, but was hoping there might be something out there already that has a bunch of small pictures of adventuring gear that could be printed and moved around.
By way of background, one thing I like to do when I run a campaign, and particularly a sandbox campaign, is to understand the history of the region the players are exploring. I find that it makes it much easier for me to make something up on the fly or answer player questions if I have an organic sense of the setting/region.
However, it results in me posting a lot of insipid questions about minor details (see also, my post about the monestary to Gyronna). This is likely one of those posts.
When was the last push to settle the Stolen Lands and which nation led that push (if any)?
Here is my theory:
Spoiler:
The last major push into the Stolen Lands happened about 200 years ago, as a result of the campaign of Choral the Conqueror. When the Aldori lords fled and founded Mivon, they attempted to control the Stolen Lands as well. They were driven by their continuing trade ties with Brevoy, and focused their efforts on controlling the two rivers connecting Mivon to Brevoy (the East Sellen and the Shrike?). It was during this period that the monestary that would become the Stag Lord's fort was built (area Z), the Temple of the Elk (area J) was consecrated, the statue to Erastil (area N) was erected, and the Rickety Bridge was built (area Q). In addition, Oleg's Trading Post (area A), which had been a simple stone barracks, was fortified to protect the new border between Brevoy and Mivon/the Stolen Lands. The holy sites to Erastil were established and funded by the Mivon exiles in an attempt to provide spiritual leaders and help civilize the land further.
However, the resources of Mivon were too thin to hold the territory and, over the course of a generation, settlers into the Stolen Lands thinned to a trickle. The turning point was a rise in humanoid aggression due to a strong leader among their ranks (in my campaign, this will likely be goblins, who will replace the kobolds because I'm burned out on them). When Mivon failed to send resources, the Temple of the Elk was descrated and control over the Northern Greenbelt was lost entirely. Oleg's Fort survived a little longer, but ultimately was abandoned due to pressure exerted by nobles from southern Brevoy who didn't appreciate a military installation so close to their border. The monestary, originally founded in Abadar's honor (as a stronger civilizing influnce in the region), was the longest lasting bastion of civilization, but ultimately fell to corruption from within through the efforts of a seductress who worshipped Gyronna.
Since that time, a few hearty homesteaders have tried to settle the region (e.g., the Boggard Lair (area O)), but none have been successful. The surge in humanoid activity eventually receded (either as a result of fae predation or in-fighting among the leaders), approximately 25 years before the campaign begins, which allowed for some trading, trapping, and hunting to the area, including the establishment of Nettle's Crossing (area S) and the trading activity evidenced by the Trap Filled Glade (area C), the Dead Trapper (area E), the Forgotten Cache (area M), and the Trapped Thylacine (area V). This current era of relative peace was threatened within the last year or so by the Stag Lord and his operations. Left unchecked, he will rise up and become the leader of a new bandit kingdom in the Greenbelt.
Any thoughts on the above, official, unofficial, or otherwise?
How is it that Gyronna, a chaotic evil goddess that only has female clerics, has a monastery in the Greenbelt? Is there some backstory here that explains why a lawful order of (presumably) men ended up worshipping a chaotic evil goddess and building a monastery to her? Also, what would those men do to earn the wrath of Gyronna, who seems like a pretty nasty character to begin with, such that she would send zombies to kill them all?
I'd be interested in hearing anyone's play experience with Kingmaker, but also suggestions on how to run it.
First, let me start off with the bare bones way I think it would be run based upon the exploration rules:
1. PCs enter hex, 5% chance of random encounter.
1B. Landmarks are discovered.
2. PCs spend time exploring hex, 15% chance per day or night of an encounter.
2A. Standard Site's are discovered.
2B. Make a skill check for any Hidden Sites.
As I was looking through the wilderness rules, I reviewed the getting lost section, and it looks like (in theory) a lost check should be made every hour if visibility is reduced (which happens per se in forest, hills, moors or mountain terrain). There's a bit of a contradiction between the getting lost rules (which have a DC that varies based on terrain) and the Survival check (which has a fixed DC to avoid getting lost), but not a big deal.
I don't want to do a Survival check per hour, but I think I might do it per hex or per day in a hex. Once a party has explored a hex, they no longer need to make checks to avoid getting lost.
I can't seem to figure out what Powerful Charge does and have a player taking an elk as his animal companion. It looks like it doubles the damage dice and +2 to damage on a charge. Is that right?
I'm running my first campaign under PFRPG and dusting off some old house rules (which are pretty light, I hate house rules). One of my longstanding house rules was to banish Appraise. I like the concept of trying to find/steal the most valuable item in a treasure trove, but the whole under/over-estimation of value always struck me as a terrible rule. I am a terrible bookkeeper, and when I give PCs treasure, I just want to be able to say "you find a statue worth 100gps". With the Appraise rules, I need to make a secret Appraise check and then record (a) the real value of the item and (b) what I told the characters it was worth.
Again, it's a neat little touch of realism, but then, when it comes time to sell stuff, the players need to have me double check the prices. Presumably, if they estimate low, they get ripped off, and if they estimate high, the buyer haggles them down to the real price (which is fixed at 1/2 list price (or at least it was in 3.5)). So, they adjust their numbers, sell their gear, and we arrive at how much loot they have, but only after cross referencing every piece of treasure I've ever given them.
Am I missing something? I hate these rules in practice, and would love to hear how (and if) others use them.
So, uh, players, avert your eyes. DMs, make sure you're aware that:
Spoiler:
The cover of the player's guide has a map of the region being explored in the AP
I suppose it's not a huge deal because the players won't know where they start on that map, or may disregard it entirely, but you might want to remove the cover...
Don't get me wrong, I love me some Kingmaker. But, as I was reading the summary I began to get the sneaking suspicion that the overall plot arc was strikingly similar to one I just ran in my 4e campaign. It sounds like the BBEG of the AP is planning on exiling the whole area into the First World. Is that correct?
I'm hoping not, because if it is, I'll probably want to do some reworking of Kingmaker. If I go that route, I'll probably replace the fey with some type of undead menace, but not zombies/skeletons. I'm thinking more of a corrupter of nature undead menace that focuses on more primal non-human centric undead.
Oddly enough, this is the third or fourth time this has happened to me - where an AP overlaps one of our existing campaigns. Maybe I just run iconic games (or focus too much on the trivial similarities).
Or, maybe it's Paizo's orbital mind lasers stealing my ideas...
I was reading Kingmaker last night and saw that at one point scalemail +1 was included as treasure. However, looking at the armor stats I was reminded that the only advantage scalemail has over chainmail is its lower cost. They're both medium armors, so any class that can wear scale can also wear chain. I'd like to avoid a pure math based argument, so instead of asking whether scale is ever better than chain, I'd like to ask about everyone's experience with chain/scale. When you play, do you ever stick with scale once you can afford chain? Do your players always sell scale?
I'm skipping around in the volume, but noticed that text states that the quests don't contain spoilers and can be provided to the PCs to help them track their progress. However, they seem to be pretty spoiler-y to me (e.g., the Quest: Temple of the Elk has information the characters will only receive if they succeed in a Diplomacy check). Am I missing something?
Posts
