Steve Geddes wrote:
Personally, I'd love to be able to buy a season in a single file, even if it were just all the PDFs sequentially with some kind of generic cover. I suspect the market for that is close to single figures though. :(
Pretty sure you can, sir! Go to the link below!
Except there should be no space between PDF-Bundle
Yeah, I've never been against fudging rolls occasionally to keep PCs alive. I had to do it a couple times against that very shadow encounter, else the infernal sorcerer would have easily died. Luckily, my players really, really get into their characters and story elements, so if an encounter brings them close to death, they truly feel the "on edge" effects from it. To me, that's a win without ever having to kill them.
That's not to say I've never killed characters. It's just to say that typically I save such moments for if they deserve it (ie. they just plain do something stupid and don't deserve a pass; typically, even they understand when this happens and agree they deserve what they get), or as we get towards the end of the AP. Once we get to that level 10-12 range, and revivification magic becomes a possibility, my mindset is that they've been playing these characters a long time and should know how to handle themselves by then. I'm still lenient, but not quite as much at that point.
Simply stated, though, I hate killing my player's characters because they put so much time and energy into them! A couple years ago, we started playing a lethal 2E campaign where it was agreed all around that there would be no fudging of rolls, and whatever happens is what happens. The death toll has been huge in that game, and the storyline has suffered because of all the new blood that is constantly coming into it. Honestly, I'm DM for the game, and I'm not having much fun with it. I think there has been at least ten character deaths, and it's really hurt the game a lot. Plus, the players are bringing in characters now that have virtually no good back stories since their characters might only survive a few sessions. Not enjoyable. I don't understand how any GM can enjoy running a death fest, let alone being a player in one.
Personally, I started the Stolen Land with a party of 3rd level PCs (Entrusting any significant task to first-level noobs? How about "no"?)
Objection, your FatR . . .
This is an opinion that I've long disagreed with. Just because a character is first-level does not make them a noob. How did they come to be a first-level fighter, or wizard, or rogue? Did they escape infancy and at the age of four suddenly realize they could wield a blade well enough to slay four goblins single-handed? Or, perhaps, that four-year-old has been able to cast burning hands and mage armor since its first words, which just happened to be arcane in nature!
Somehow, I doubt it. It took time and experience for these first-level characters to get as good as a first-level character gets. That can mean any number of experiences, in fact! In my KM game, I had a Paladin, Sorcerer, Rogue (spy), and a Magus all come in at first-level. Every single one of them had a plethora of experiences in their history that enabled them to get that skilled.
My point: There's no reason why a first-level character can't have plenty of experiences that make them qualified to do pretty much anything an adventure or AP desires of them for start-up. Naturally, there's a matter of perspective in all these things, and if it's your preference to start a game with higher level characters, that's completely legit. I've never understood the thinking that deems first-level characters as inept, however. It just doesn't make sense!
As to the problem at hand with a monty alchemist? It's true that alchemists, built properly, can be exquisitely powerful; however, any class in this game, built properly, can be exquisitely powerful. Especially since APs are designed with characters who aren't min/maxed in mind. I had an alchemist in my SS AP, and he was a true powerhouse in that game. It's not necessarily a game-breaker, though.
My suggestion on this would be to just let it go for a while. If all the players are having fun, then the game seems to be going well. In time, as the AP continues to progress, things will get more difficult, and the alchemist won't be as potent, though he'll undoubtedly remain a force throughout. The nice thing about this AP is that it enables you to build overarching villains that can study the characters' styles and exploit them. I would advise taking advantage of this boon. =)
Also, Telly Savalas plays a Cossack officer without even bothering with an accent.
Telly Savalas is so cool, he doesn't need to bother with an accent.
Almost, but not quite, as cool as Sean Connery, whose accent fits the nationality . . . no matter what! ;)
Lee Hanna wrote:
Just to let you know, I've had this in mind for a while. My group finished Book 1 this weekend, so this will now go into my planning process.
Yup, my group just started Book Two in earnest a week ago, and this stuff is already been planned to proceed in the storyline, though I'm switching it up a little by putting a hobgoblin emissary in with Hargulka, since the reason why he's doing what he's doing in my AP involves him being recruited into the Red Hand (with invasion slotted for Book Three) . . .
Thank you, friend, for giving me something to go off from! This stuff looks fantastic, and I'd love to uses it. My hopes are to get the hardcovers of both Razor Coast and Heart of the Razor Coast to contribute to my S&S campaign, which will also have a third storyline involving Zon-Kuthon which I'm working on myself. As it will be a couple years before this becomes a reality, I can wait a month or two to get my hands on this!
Again, thanks much for the reply. It's much appreciated!
I went to FGG website, and I can't purchase any Razor Coast stuff from there either . . . it keeps referring me to the kickstarter that has long expired, despite the little tag beneath all the Razor Coast products saying "Buy It".
Will it be a while before non-kickstarter folk will be able to buy this stuff? If so, do we have a specific date?
I'm so confuzzled! I want to give my money away, but you people won't let me!!!!!
But, via the rule, you can't get out wielding a longsword, scimitar, or battleaxe--all of which are one-handed slashing weapons, but a dagger, shortsword, or handaxe can effectively cut you out? That seems somewhat contradictory to me, I'm afraid. If being in something's gullet is restrictive enough that you need a light weapon to cut yourself out with, it only makes sense to me that you wouldn't be able to use anything larger, else you should be able to cut yourself out with something larger. However, the rule specifically speaks against that.
But it appears that we've an interesting contradiction here, then. It does say that creatures swallowed whole keep the grappled condition, but just a moment later (which I've italicized and bolded) it states clearly that only a light weapon can be used to escape. This contradicts grapple rules, where any one-handed weapon can still be used to fight with. This kind of makes for an interesting conundrum, I guess.
I, too, plan on having this campaign ride over the end of Book Six, though the only concrete plans I've put in place at the moment would be a confrontation with a Starspawn of Cthulu based on an on-going subplot I'm running with a fifth player (Heaven Oracle) that only gets to join us occasionally (usually run an adventure involving her every 2-3 levels).
Otherwise, I'm pretty much going to see what develops based on the players actions throughout the AP to decide what fun we'll be having later. We've technically only started Book Two . . .
Urath DM wrote:
Yup, you're right. Got my words twisted around a bit there. What you two said is what I was thinking, but failed to convey properly. Despite that, the purpose for what I was saying remains unchanged. ;)
. . . if the mythic stuff is added in.
Well, the Mythic stuff is in there, as the AP has been designed around the Mythic Rules. The question has been whether it's possible to actually play the AP without the Mythic Rules there. The answer to this question has thus far been it is possible, but some substantial alterations must be done to the AP because of the power level which it sustains. JJ has said on a few different occasions--one being just a short distance up--that this AP is the result of the Mythic rules happening, not the other way around. That's a pretty good indicator that WotR and Mythic very much go hand-in-hand.
James Jacobs wrote:
I shall spoiler my reply to this, since it does not appear to be on topic.
Sorry if my comments above raised some hackles, as that was certainly not my intent. However, I do believe that you may have misinterpreted what I as saying . . .
That 13th level alchemist eliminated that CR 15 foe as a base class strictly, not as a mythic character. It was during out Serpent Skull campaign, and it happened roughly 10 months ago--in other words, long before the mythic stuff was revealed to us. Admittedly, the player is a numbers cruncher, so he knows exactly how to put things together for maximum effectiveness.
My reservations about mythic, then (and I'm sure you've heard this same type of thing a million times by now), revolves around how it will be able to keep things from turning into a one man show (based upon whomever wins initiative on a given round) due to the vastly increased power levels we're talking about here. This reservation comes in light of the fact that if a straight base class can walk a creature two CR steps above it at 13th level in the core game, how much easier will it be for a mythic-tiered character to be able to do so? Thus, it makes for a much greater struggle providing anything challenging for the players and vastly reducing the need for teamwork. Sure, a 13th level alchemist/tier 6 mythic character (ie. 16th level character equivalent) would and should destroy a foe one CR below it, but my concern is that such a character will easily destroy CR 18-19 foes with just as much ease when we look at the power levels of characters once we start reaching the higher levels.
This is not a blast against mythic! This is a reservation I have about mythic based on the current power levels of mere 13th level characters (such as the alchemist I mentioned above).
I've spent more money with your company than ever I had with 2E AD&D, so I think it's pretty obvious I appreciate your products. This one just concerns me a little based on the experience I've had with higher level characters in my games completely making their companions unnecessary. It's something I get concerned about. That's all.
Hey, I'll try anything once . . . well, almost! But I do have reservations about mythic, as well. I watched a 13th level Alchemist bring down a Neothilid (CR 15) in one round without any help from his friends. If stuff starts getting that powerful as a base class at just beyond 12th level, I'm not sure how they're going to keep mythic-tiered PCs reined in enough to make it fun for anyone except the first guy to go in combat. (This is an extreme case, I'll grant you, but I still think it has relevance.)
However, I am geeked about learning more about the Worldwound, so you know I'll be getting this AP whether I ever choose to run it or not! =)
Now, now ... let's not forget James Sutter, who is the resident First World expert at Paizo. Put him in that last above with Mr. Spicer and Mr. Pett and you have a guarantee buy!
If you were seeking equilibrium, then this thread should have been entitled "Heterosexuality in Golarion." I fear you failed with this one all the way around, my friend . . . Not only was this thread a complete waste of space, as you clearly have nothing to say here, but you couldn't even get the title correct.
I'm truly sorry.
And before I get crucified by a mob of loyal Paizo fanboys fans . . .
If you get crucified (and I very much doubt that such would happen, as we're very much a more humanistic society these days that doesn't abide in capital punishment), it would likely be for the use of that rather derogatory noun at the tail end of the quoted line above . . . a noun that, not surprisingly, always seems to end up in use when people tend to disagree with someone's point of view on something.
I'll give you credit though and note that you did put "fans" immediately after, which indicates that you probably did have second thoughts about using said noun but simply forgot to take it out before posting.
C'mon, man. Let's not resort to name-calling here.
But the whole "Earth thing", that's pretty bad (for me at least)
I'm guessing this doesn't bother me nearly so bad because one of the best campaigns I've ever run was an old 2E Ravenloft: 1890s setting. That campaign ran for over eight years, almost exclusively based upon stories created by myself, but very fantastical in nature. Players loved it too!
I don't really see this as being any different, except I'm using a different rules system, and the adventure takes place in Siberia, which means it's way out of the way, so anything that happens probably wouldn't be heard about in the rest of the world anyhow.
I do have friends, however, that wouldn't buy into this jump. I do think I could convince them though . . . We've played a lot of different stuff over the years, and they've pretty much come to the understanding that I wouldn't lead them astray.
Yeah, I could have a lot of fun with this sort of thing! =)
I read the following somewhere and thought it applicable here . . .
Sorry you feel that way. Not sorry enough to stop liking it though =D
Here's the best part though: Unlike Forgotten Realms, that did handle their progressive over-arching story line incredibly poorly, Paizo has done exactly the opposite in their handling of setting-based fiction. While FR altered their setting irrevocably in a way that made things all the more complicated for those who played in that setting through the canonizing of everything, Paizo could actually canonize every PF Tales book they've published without altering a single thing from their RPG setting books. This is because Paizo was smart about it and provide you with amazing characters/events that are compelling, but not Golarion-shattering. Their books help to flesh out the regions in which they're set, and give you some incredibly awesome NPCs to play with (I've already started work on how I'm going to fit in a guest appearance or two of Jeggare and Radovan from Gross' novels into my Shattered Star campaign because I love both those characters), but when the stories are over, the status quo changes very, very little, if at all. They're just stories of people in Golarion doing what they do.
It's a brilliant way to handle the fiction line, and I love it much! And that doesn't even mention how much I greatly appreciate the fantastic authors they bring in to tell these stories. Paizo does things the right way. They give you all these different avenues by which you can better grasp the workings of their world, but, in the end, they let you--the GM and your gaming group--decide how Golarion changes in your campaigns. They don't force any of it down your throat. Frankly, they got it right. ;)
So, as does that wonderful individual I quoted above, I'm terribly sorry you feel the way you do, and I honestly feel that you're missing out on some wonderful reading material (if for nothing else than to just get more culturally specific information about different regions in Golarion), but I'm not going to tell you what to enjoy or not enjoy . . .
I am going to respectfully request that you not try to eliminate the fiction, however. It very much has a gaming purpose, and I do so enjoy it!
More then likely they will give the redcap class levels wich will be the case for most if not all the example creatures in this book. These books tend use class levels, templates, and monster advancement rules for there example creature. Since fey tend to be humaniod in shape giving them class levels makes sense. Though they may surprise us so who knows.
They still put the variations of creatures in there though, correct? In the various "Revisited" books I own, they throw numerous variations of the creature in there, so perhaps the dunter will make that list!
But I assume it will still be playable if we have no desire to use the Mythic rules?
With heavy rewrites, I'd wager that any AP is playable however you'd wish it to be!
I'm not sure if design without the mythic rules will be present within the AP itself though. I believe Wrath of the Righteous is firmly attached to the new rules system.
There is nothing really in here beyond the APG, so you can easily run this AP without allowing the ultimates if you want everything to be on even ground. Honestly, there's not a ton added from the APG either, but they did rework a couple characters into APG classes and the like.
I'm currently running this AP with a group that meets roughly once a month, so it's been a long, ongoing campaign. When we started, I only allowed them use of the CRB because that's all the baddies had access to, and when the AE came out, I let them respec all their characters to include APG content, as that's now been introduced. I still don't allow anything from other books beside those two hardcovers, and my players are doing just fine (despite not being overly optimized as a group: I have a human undead sorcerer, an elf infernal sorcerer, a gnome monk, and a gnome druid).
But like the jersey, ahem Sandpoint Devil (and some other pretty americano-mythic stuff) it really depends on the players knowing the Roanoke vanishing connection. Easy enough for most people over on the western end of the pond.. I am not so sure about the European side^^
Oh, c'mon man! There are European legends and mythology thrown all throughout a great many APs! Don't begrudge an adventure that uses one of ours! ;)
Just ordered a hardcopy. Reign of Winter better be an excellent AP, so I can use this book to its fullest extent. ;)
Being that Reign of Winter isn't an Irrisen AP, I'm not sure if you'll be able to use this book to its fullest extent . . . You'll probably be able to get some good use out of it, however! It's a great book, so the purchase is a good one at any rate. =)
I'm just asking because I'm curious . . .
How does Gargadros know Common? I know it lists Common under languages for Rune Giants in the Bestiary, but that's for contemporary Rune Giants met by the PCs. Gargadros would never have heard Common spoken since it didn't exist when he was alive.
Again, this is more of a curiosity than anything else and had to ask! =)
I would also like to suggest The Harrowing, which can be run before Fortress of the Stone Giants with a little modification.
I've not quite gotten there yet in my game, but Xanesha managed to escape at the end of Skinsaw. Thus, I'll be using her (disguised) for the Varisian gypsy, and Brodert Quink will become the scholar that is kidnapped. In my continuity, I'll be running this adventure after the stone giant attack on Sandpoint.
about self-enhancement vs. magic item christmas tree threads
Which, by the way, I'm using the majority of the suggestions expressed by Evil Lincoln in one of those threads in my current KM game. They seem to be working rather well so far! Admittedly, I don't remember which forum I found it in, alas.
Additionally, I'll say this whole argument being made by a certain few about thread-moving has indeed been rather nonsensical. There are far better places and reasons to harbor anger than at devs moving threads to where they're supposed to go.
Seriously, that putting together an ancient artifact of sin is going to have some ramifications is a no-brainer . . .
It shouldn't be considered an artifact of sin, should it?
I mean, technically, Xin was all about the seven virtues or order, which is what the Sihedron was all about. It was the Runelords that corrupted that concept, I believe. Even the artifact's powers follow the virtues of rule, not the sins.
If they don't see the connection, and if all else fails, just use Shalelu to get them there. She's been out scouting around on the goblins, so it would be easy enough to have her report that she's witnessed some goings-on at Thistletop that makes her feel that something strange is going on there. Reinforce this by having her mention that she's seen a bugbear (her arch-enemy, might I add) and some humans inside the fortification from time-to-time. The fact that such beings are working with the goblins incredibly unusual.
I'm kind of doing a mixed Numeria and Dark Tapestry gig. I've placed locations all over the Stolen Lands map where star metals arrived long, long ago and have been buried ever since. They'll have the opportunity to mine these unique metals in their kingdom building and do some interesting things with them. However, with the arrival of these star metals came all manner of alien life that they'll have to tangle with, as well as a plot to bring forth a Star Spawn of Cthulu from the depths of the Lake of Mists and Veils. Once word gets out that these star metals exist within the area, Numeria will become very interested in the claiming of them. This will enable me to do some fun infiltration from that area. I'll probably start with undercover androids, but you can bet that there will be some amped-up Gearsmen before it's all over!
Nick O'Connell wrote:
Is there any difference of the artwork of the iconics?
All of the iconics artwork is from the original, I do believe. At least, I don't recall seeing anything new. Now, there's plenty of new art in there, mind you, but nothing that pertains to the iconics.
In answer to your first question, I would say, "absolutely." Especially if the laws of the society said character found him-/herself in condoned the drinking of blood for nourishment or survival. Additionally, if said character chose to drink animal blood as opposed to that of an intelligent being, then I also believe this could be justified. Thus, it's dependent on societal norms/laws (although I should ask, would one consider a society that accepts the drinking of an unwilling, intelligent being's blood good?) or the source of the blood in question.
In answer to your second question, I am of the inclination that a Paladin isn't justified in killing anyone without just cause. If said Paladin uses his detect evil ability and discovers that someone is evil, this does not mean the Paladin is justified in slaughtering said person. People can be evil in many different ways and not necessarily do anything wrong. Thus, if the Paladin detects said character as evil, but has not otherwise identified said character as having done anything wrong, then no, absolutely not.
However, if said character forces him-/herself onto another unwilling individual, cuts them open and begins to drink freely of their blood (even if the victim here detects as evil) . . . then, yes, absolutely yes that Paladin is justified in killing that character.
Great stuff, MB! Thanks!
I've got some stuff lined up that run along with your proposals, so I think it'll be good for my AP. Just a couple things off the top of my head:
- One of my PCs plays a sylph that was "gifted" to the Medvyed family via agents of the First World. She has already been contacted by a powerful agent of the First World about being more observant and asking more questions when it comes to odd findings among fey and fey deaths in the area. Additionally, there will be some clandestine work on the part of the fey to get one of their own into the wedding bed of the king later in the AP to become a player in their kingdom--both against a certain powerful nymph and for the benefit of other . . . mechanizations of the First World.
- I'm using Dudemeister's troll nation under Hargulka in the south for Book 2 (we're not quite finished with Book 1), but his will be more of a opening spearhead for a much, much larger assault coming later in the form of a massive hobgoblin invasion that will coincide with Book 3. Yup, I'm bringing in the "Red Hand of Doom" to give the PCs the opportunity to defend their kingdom much earlier on than Book 6. Because of all this, I'll be bringing in the warfare rules much earlier than Book 5!
- Additionally, in their romp around the northern Narlmarches, they've come into contact with numerous hunters/trappers that have left an impression and will have plenty more opportunities for interaction down the road. The Paladin in the group (the step-brother of the sylph mentioned above) follows the Sarenrae, and so his mission against the bandits in Book 1 has been one of redemption as opposed to annihilation, and he's managed to succeed at converting a couple of them away from banditry.
So, plenty to come in this AP! It should be noted, however, that we're playing it along the Slow XP progression because of all the possibilities it presented!
All I'll have to do is tell my players that this is an AP that delves further into ancient Thassilonian history. We're about half-way through the third book of RotR, and they're loving the AP a great deal because they've taken an instant fanaticism to Thassalonian lore. Telling them that they'd be treasure hunters seeking fortune and glory with discovery of an ancient relic from Thassilon would spark their imagination something fierce!
Of course, I also plan to turn this into a slow progression AP and run a ton of the PFS scenarios within it, as well (not to mention some of my own little ideas).
I do remember reading a post by Jacobs where he said something to the effect of being displeased that they sent Seekers off to print without letting him go over it first, especially since the Society was one of his babies. Because of this, there was a great deal that they got "wrong" in that book.
I don't remember why it ended up bypassing him, though he did make mention of that too . . .
Trace Coburn wrote:
If this particular goblin was indeed adopted by a local, for whatever reason, I'd actually half-expect them to have been driven out of town by bullies and wind up at Nualia's side, helping her plan to torch the whole town. If he did stick it out, he'd have to be one seriously obstinate lttle SOB, and his behaviour would probably be more human than 'goblin'.
The bold emphasis above is really what it boils down to for me. Any goblin raised in Sandpoint (and somehow accepted amongst the populace there--some residents of the town are pretty bigoted regarding goblins [eg. Daviren Hosk of the Goblin Squash Stables; #38 on the map]) wouldn't even act like a goblin, but more akin to the human culture it was raised in. At that point, what's the fun of playing a goblin? It's a "Catch-22" scenario that really makes playing a goblin in this AP not even worth it in the end.
I'm guessing buy the books you need separately, then? The above is a pretty darn good deal, but if it doesn't look that good to you because of stuff you wouldn't use, the simplest answer is to just purchase what you need and call it good.
I've never played this AP (we were supposed to, but the person who was going to run it had to bow out for familial reasons), but I've been told it's amongst the best Paizo's ever written.
Anyhow, all the best to you and yours!
During the second session of our Kingmaker campaign (which I GM), the 1st level party was attacked by a troll. Two PCs were knocked unconscious, and they lost a horse to the creature, but all successfully fled the scene with a bit of teamwork.
When--on the next night--they were able to spy an owlbear coming from a relative distance, they packed up their things and bolted from camp without bothering to stick around for a fight. They're learning! ;)
Steven T. Helt wrote:
I love high level play, but there are some definite math issues. When success or failure is largley determined by rolling a d20, having a +40 starts to result in weird dynamics. The game quickly becomes either a cakewalk for PCs, or impossible for PCs. It takes a lot of houseruling and fudging to make the game exciting and fun.
I have a friend who has found builds that can reach such numbers at sub-20th level . . . I couldn't even imagine where those numbers would go by the time you hit 25th, let alone 40th.