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

Werecorpse's page

873 posts (877 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 873 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
It's clear. I had the same puzzle. We eventually concluded it was ambiguous and went with spell level (ie cure wounds is always +2). We figured they're pretty good about explicitly using 'spell slot' when that's what they mean.

1. A first level spell would be +3 (level +2), and

2. I have the opposite interpretation. Note The same wording is used in the dispel magic spell.

Read the paragraph on page 201 about casting spells at a higher level it seems that if you use a 3rd level spell to cast cure wounds you have just cast a 3rd level spell.

DM Jeff wrote:
I use masterwork weapons in 5e. I decided if one damage die of the weapon rolls a 1, consider it a 2 instead. That's it.

This is what I am planning as well.

I am thinking of also having it double the short range for thrown weapons.

A possible issue with this is that in 3.x all magic weapons were masterwork (the logic being as I understand it that most magic weapons would have been crafted to masterwork level before being enchanted) and the magic bonus overwrote the masterwork bonus. Do you then in 5e say that all magic weapons have the masterwork bonus?

Do you have masterwork armour in 5e?

Irontruth wrote:
thenovalord wrote:

I think the OP has quit the thread!

It's their one and only post on the forums as well.

Maybe it is just a trick and they are actually a duck?


Off topic

Diffan wrote:
There's also lots of free stuff for 4th including downloadable pre-gen characters, classes, adventures, and simply buying 1 month of DDI gets you the ENTIRE system of rules, classes, races, monsters, feats, powers/spells, and adventures. You could download all the Dungeon adventures and the Scales of War AP for 1 lump price.

Is this right? I have never used DDI or 4e but I would be interested in downloading the online dungeons and adventures to read them and possibly mine them.

So, assuming I'm a noob at this stuff what would I do and what would I be able to get ?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why are you quitting playing pathfinder?

I quit because it was too complex at levels 7+ and just kept getting more complex as it went up, over rewarded game mechanic mastery and took too long to design and play combats.

I initially switched to Savage Worlds a few years ago as a simpler system (I still like it) and now play 5e. It doesn't have any of the problems I mentioned above.

thejeff wrote:

Thinking about this a little more: 5E really changes the paradigm of treasure and loot. Wealth is no longer a mechanical aspect of the character's power, the way it is in 3.x and in different ways in older versions. It's not a mechanical reward, like xp, and shouldn't be treated as such. Which means, among other things, that there's no need to worry about mechanics when you're handing it out. There's no right amount.

Treasure isn't a mechanical reward. It's a narrative reward. One among many. That gives you a lot more freedom to use it to shape the game you (including the players) want to play. You can do a lot of things you can't really do in PF without houserules. You can play the heroes who do their deeds without worrying about rewards. You can play down on their luck mercenaries always scrounging for the next job to pay the bills. You can play the group saving up for strongholds and titles. You can play Conan, looting a bag of gold and drinking it up in a wild debauch before the next adventure. You can even have them stumble across a lost treasure and have the game focused on defending it.

And you can do any of it without screwing up game balance.

I think this is the way to look at treasure once you get past about 5th level. Up until then you are buying armour, healing potions and the like. Beyond that point those things become easy to obtain and cash becomes a narrative reward.

This means you have to allow it to be used in the narrative. Give the party the chance to gain some information, reputation, help out a friend, live well etc if they have cash.

That's really interesting that 11th level 5e = 14th level pathfinder. Partly because I would have said 14th level pathfinder = 16th level 3/3.5e. Maybe I could actually run Rappan Athuk to the end.

I am running pre 5e adventures converted to 5e as well (just started). I would imagine that the treasure has been filleted a bit to fit with the 5e approach to magic.

What magic items do you have at 11th?

Zombieneighbours wrote:

Pg. 84 of DMG says six to eight medium to hard encounters a day, and list a daily exp budget of 9000 exp per character.

That works out at around 4 medium (4800exp/character) and 2 hard(3800/character), with maybe a quest reward thrown in to push it up to 9000 exp for the day.

The difference between the exp for 10th and 11th level is 2100 exp.

I.E. A 10th level character makes 11th level in 2.3(ish) adventure days.

I have multiplied the amount of exp earned for defeating a monster by 0.4 which means you have to defeat 2.5 times as many creatures to level up. I do give some quest exp

Other house rules:
1. You have to undertake some training to level up at odd levels - this doesn't have to be after getting the exp (ie after becoming level 3 the player knows before they can become level 5 they have to at some stage get some training)
2. Lingering injuries - but I have my own rules on how you get them, what they are and how to remove them.
3. Peak condition benefits - if a PC is rested and has done some training or gained some morale type benefit (ie trained with Master Bob, or listened to a great song) they gain a small edge (one example is "powerful - you may re roll a single damage dice on 3 occasions, another is hardy - you can automatically succeed at a single death save)
4. Limited use items (ie potions, scrolls, some wands) when you use them you roll a d4 on a 1 it's the last use. On any other number there is still some magic left (the players love this, it stresses the unpredictability of magic). Sometimes it's a d6 - if you roll a 1 it drops to a d4 next time (same with d8,d10 etc) (I charge double for PHB healing potions as a result)

Rules 1-3 above and the slow exp is partially to stretch out the time taken in game.

Do you get many limited use items?

Potions scrolls wands etc?

Seldriss wrote:


I am using the following house rules for D&D 5th edition, some pretty similar to the posts in this thread:

- Bonus ability at creation: +1 to one ability score, or 1 skill proficiency, or 1 proficiency save, or 1 feat.

- In addition to the ability increase, characters gain 1 feat every 3 levels.

- Reduced HP recovery from resting: 1HP per level + Con mod for short rest, 1 HD (up to max 1 HD per proficiency bonus) + Con score for long rest.

- Adjusted AC from armors: 12/leather, 13/studded, 15/chainmail, etc. Basically the original armor values from 3.5/Pathfinder. I don't know why they lowered these.

- Flanking (as per D&D3.5 or Pathfinder).

- Inspirations: Up to 1 inspiration per proficiency bonus or Cha modifier, whichever higher.

- I am also considering increasing the ability score bonus from subraces to +2, instead of +1.

What do you think?

Most crucial thing to remember is that 5e is a different game.

I think a major point of 5e limiting feats and making them have greater effect was to follow the principal of giving characters less stuff but making it bigger so a feat is special. It would not be unusual for characters will reach 12th level before even taking a feat. I think giving them all these extra feats works against that intention.

The reason the AC is what it is has to do with bounded accuracy, if you in essence just give all armour wearers +1 AC you simply increase the defence of all characters except those that don't wear armour. The biggest difference this will make is to the heavy armour, shield using defence based fighter who will gain a fair bit from it, and monks, wizards etc who will lose. The reason they lowered them was because 5e is a different game.

I considered flanking but favoured ditching the +2 bonuses for simplicity. With the reduced attacks of opportunity it's easy to flank. My players appreciated not having to gang up in the right squares to get a bonus.

I allowed a max of 2 inspirations - no one ever got there. I still don't have a handle on giving them out.

As for the stat bonuses an extra 1 point won't make a difference - except to humans I guess. I made my players roll up their characters (stats in order, no rearrange) because I wanted that old school feel. Initially they were grumpy about but after about 30 hours of play and 1 death (new character rolled up) they like it.

My anecdotal experience is the same as Tormsskull's.

IMO The hydrophobia sufferer who crosses the water to get a more powerful item, then justifies it as "character development" is wrapping their optimisation in roleplaying fluff (that is not hard to see through), rather than actually roleplaying.

Often optimisation and roleplaying can walk along the same path. The relevant question is what do you do when optimisation says go left and roleplaying say ago right? If you pay no heed to following the optimisation path this is an easy decision.

delvesdeep wrote:

I doubt whether I will every finish off the Adventure Path now. My goals now to create a new group of players to begin a new campaign using half the old group and a few newbies. Life just keeps getting int he way but I've gone to long without playing now so its time to start again. I'm looking forward to it!

Where did your campaign get up to?

Can you please cancel my subscriptions for adventure path after the final Giantslayer and for modules after Feast of Dust.

Thank you.

Nicolas Logue wrote:
B. Vic wrote:
Maxslasher26 wrote:
I love this adventure. Bhuts and hullathoins are some of my favorite creatures. Plus, the pennagolan at the end was an awesome touch. If you ever get around to it, definitely right a sequel.

He has another sequel to finish before he goes diving into WW2.

P.S. I like Bhuts too.

HA! I'm on it B-man! The Lightning Curse of Anuk Saal approacheth...beware...

High level thread necromancy required....

Did this sequel ever happen? Did it get converted into something else?

I am looking for monk/monastery adventures

Fallenone23 wrote:

So my group went BACK down to Jzadirune because we are glutton's for punishment......and we fought the grell.....and by DM's a dick sometimes.

halfing rouge stealth/hide moving around, while group is moving into room as well, Grell snatches him, DM says we don't know he got snatched because he was hidden/no noise. Grell grabs him up and runs off.

I make a nat 20 spot check, says i don't see grell 30 ft in air, when i have clean LOS on him if you look on the board, because the monster is on the board. Battle starts a round later, we attempt to web the grell, failed. DM says now we can't see the grell at all. moves the monster around for another turn, then takes monster off board, says we can't see at all because of web. he finishes eating the halfling, PC Death. comes out of web we set on fire, arrows fly, finally kill it before he grabs someone else.

I hate this place. Can't wait till my party learns to stop going into horrible pits of death.

Jzadirune is a real grind because at low level you have little resilience, I don't plan to let the players go I to it until they are 2nd or maybe 3rd level. Big dungeons at low level are just repetitive as progress is so slow.

But for that encounter as you described the issue was more the DM than the dungeon.

SmiloDan wrote:

Pathfinder really rewards rule mastery, and 5th Edition is much more forgiving.

But it's weird that you can pick and choose different spells with ease as you level up, but not mundane skills.

Meh pick and choose different recipes but can't as easily learn about history or how to animal handle.

Arakhor wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Besides, I like a lot of other things about 5E. I just have never liked the "You have only a few skills, but you're really good at them approach." I prefer generalists. Which works well in some games, but fails in PF and can't really be done in 5E.
My thoughts exactly.

My primary suggestion would be to Play a bard, especially a knowledge bard Or maybe a rogue, a knowledge cleric or a champion fighter. They all get a bit of skill boost along the way. Multiclass into rogue, ranger or bard if you want to skill up later on.

IMO If you want to play a skills generalist, they exist. You just can't be a skills generalist and a class that doesn't focus on skills. This is a feature of the game, not a bug. Skill granularity leads more toward skill min maxing (ie focussing on the more commonly used and in game valuable skills than the more esoteric skills) than generalisation.

The house rule I would offer as GM would be to let you freeze a proficiency at 5th and add the bonuses to another skill if that's what you wanted (I.e. when you go up to 5th you don't go up in it but you can add it to something else).

One way of looking at the system in a 3e way is that say you get 5 skills at +2 at first level, they go up to +3 at 5th so that means you get 10 points to distribute at 1st level (maximum bonus +2) and another 5 skill points to distribute at 5th, 9th, 13th and 17th. If your class picks up an extra proficiency you get extra points. You may need to come up with some sort of class skill mechanism ( like a lower max for non class skills etc). My view is this would likely lead to the 3e min,max on skills - with perception athletics and acrobatics being maxed for the wizard.

It's hard to put a finger on it.
Countries and personalities with their own agendas. Not just good guys and bad guys.
Lower magic than forgotten realms. But also some almighty weird eldritch stuff, like Vecna.
Detailed but with broad brush strokes.

For me I always felt that forgotten realms was similar in its generic fantasy trope but is trying too hard to be "better than Greyhawk". Like everything Greyhawk has it tries to have one, but better. That doesn't work.

I am just about to start a 5e campaign. I will return to Greyhawk after 6 years in Golarion. Shackled City with a bucketload of extras to make it a sandbox with an adventure path spine. I am setting it around the time of the 3e era gazetteer and am looking forward to the influence of the battle between the Scarlet Brotherhood and the Sea Princes spilling over into Cauldron.

Oh, and yes I would love some 5e greyhawk ( any non massive adventure path 5e really - WOTC doesn't make small adventures I can fit into my Greyhawk)

I would think that Triel is the most charismatic of the three leaders and with her gone the alley bashers and hill folk would pull out. Really once their hidden lair has been found they best leg it.

Iirc the reason for stealing the wands was to ransom them back for money. Once they are found they should go and hide again. This probably means the party will fail to recover enough wands.

This is a disappointing way for the adventure to end so perhaps Tarkilar could stay in the ruins and some of the dead could be brought back to assist him? Skaven can live to fight another day.

I read a more interesting reason for the bad guys wanting the wands which was along the lines that they were using them to drain the water from the ruins to discover something within the lake. I can't recall exactly what it was down there. But if you follow that motivation they might have a reason to stay.

Greystaff wrote:
Yes. I modified the "Cauldron and Environs" map to reflect plantation locations. It's not very complicated but it helped me describe what the players saw as they took various trips outside the city. If you have an email address, I'll send it to you for use however you see fit.

Thanks Greystaff. It's

Thomashobday at hotmail dot com

Greystaff wrote:
I'm not familiar enough with Greyhawk to give recommendations for that setting. Generically you could have them as the routes to the various mines and plantations that are mentioned in the various installments but never specifically placed on the maps.

Did you use them when you ran it?

I suspect there is no canon for this. I am looking for ideas for expanding the area. I am thinking of having Port Shaw from Razor Coast set up some distance to the South so the Hollowsky road could go there.

Looking at the hardcover map on page 28 there are 4 roads that lead to/from Cauldron. One goes to the west past the Lucky Monkey. We know this goes to Sasserine .

One goes past each of Kingfisher Hollow, Hollowsky and Redgorge.

Where do these lead to?

Any suggestions?

Yeah, but the guardians if the galaxy movie wasn't premised on a big comic book following to sell tickets was it? IMO It was just a story turned into a film - using a bit of goodwill from Marvel, from space films etc

I would have thought getting the D&D brand a bit of a spit & polish would be all that Hasbro would need ( I certainly wouldn't think the rpg was anymore than a small plank in their intellectual property plan) then they could make a Drizzt movie riffing off the books, the recent warm fuzziness toward the game ( including cprg's , board games etc ) and 'magic/fantasy' films like LOTR, hobbit, harry potter. They could then see if they have got the Marvel style movie franchise they dream of.

( of course this means they need some sort of control of the D&D film licence - what happened to that?)

I am looking to try out 5e and this looks like a good, all level campaign.

Has anyone done a 5e conversion? Of so can you share?

When did that one come out? If is was October 2014 then I think I already knew that. I thought there was another one due about now.

When is the next one after that due?

( I admit to being quite ignorant about all this I am just an interested onlooker)

So what happened in the most recent ICV2 list?

3 people marked this as a favorite.

For me and most of my group it wasn't the complexity of character build that was a major contributor to making 3.x popular.

It was that it had a robust system for a tactical level combat. Things like flanking, attacks of opportunity, 5' step, straight line charging, miniature scale movement etc all were new for d&d. We had rarely used mini before because combat didn't really benefit from it. AD&D was more about resource management - combats were simpler - fighters at the front, magic users at the back hand wave the rest.

Suddenly 3.x added a tactical combat game to the roleplaying, adventure, storytelling game that had always been D&D.

Now I agree that the character build part was initially fun too but that side of it became more and more like homework. The imbalance between characters, problems that were created by things going slightly wrong, the maths to check each round based on buffs and the like became frustrating. But having been exposed to the added tactical element for my group we couldn't go back totally to the hand wave tactics of previous editions - not when playing D&D. I mean, we could do it a bit, but those tactical combats were fun.

So if 5e can be a roleplaying, storytelling, adventure, tactical game without making any part too complicated I am in.

Oh and I am 47 and started with the basic set in 79.

Kthulhu wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Digitalelf wrote:
Just sayin'
If your GM is throwing you into the Mana Wastes or facing you against cabals of beholders, that's introducing AMFs through fiat.
As much as I hate to seem even for a moment like I'm in agreement with David Bowles, if you extend GM fiat that far, then the mere fact that an adventure happens is GM fiat.

Well yes but I think the point is that if the way you deal with a class, or spell or whatever is by having a bunch of " you can't do that " things then you are already conceding you have a problem that "normal" rules don't solve.

It's like designing a river crossing problem for a 6th level party then saying there is some magic preventing you from flying.

Btw you look way over there, in the distance , you can see the point of this thread : )

Pathfinder is awesome for those that like it, same for 5e.

Has anyone played 5e to high level yet? How did that compare ? ( I haven't but I have given up on trying to run 3.x/pathfinder above 15th)

Zardnaar wrote:
Diffan wrote:
Werecorpse, I think Bounded Accuracy will help in the department of keeping monsters relevant to higher level characters.

Kind of does but AoEs and the PC power level and copious amounts of healing negates it. I have used 40 Kobolds on PCs at elvel 8 and 40 hobgoblins at level 12. They can get a few hits in but are mostly bait for level 3 spells.

Depleting PC spells and then hitting them with stuff that matters kind of works.

This is an interesting result, I would have thought they would be a decent threat in 5e, especially with their ranged attacks and pack tactics/martial advantage. I can certainly understand AoE being a crucial part of such an encounter. I hadn't really picked up that 5e allowed copious in combat healing.

Was this against 4pcs?

I guess some of my assumptions may turn out to be incorrect.

Maybe I'm wrong about how 5e will play out.

Maybe my perception of 3e/pathfinder is coloured by most campaigns I have been in or run in the last 14 years being adventure paths ( I ran a converted Night Below from 2000-2006 before Paizo started producing them). Maybe it's partly because most published adventure paths seem to use the "to help the party be tough enough to face the next encounter have them beat up this side quest" trope. Or maybe because when we played 3e we went up levels so much faster than when we played 1e so if you met a threat that was too tough a legitimate solution was to leave it alone, go up a few levels, then come back & kill it.

I guess in the 1e games I ran it felt like a bad guy was almost like a terrain feature. Everyone knew the evil summoner lived in the hills which are infested by ogres - but he had lived there for years and no-one could do anything about it except thwart his plots when he sent his minions into the kingdom. In 3e he would be a threat for about 2 months until the party hit 10th level.

But this is probably more a speed of levelling up effect, and it doesn't really look like the default speed of levelling up has changed so this will still be a feature. It does look like numbers matter a lot more. So if a tribe of orcs rules an area it will be tougher to just run them out when you reach 8th level.

I guess I am looking forward to more intractable foes in the campaign world that aren't uber level.

How do other perceive it will play out compared to pathfinder?

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I haven't played much 5e but to me what looks like a difference in style of game between 5e & pathfinder is that pathfinder seems to suit the epic adventure path style of game and 5e a more sandbox style.

A pathfinder adventure path often involves events which are essentially a way to gain levels to allow you to trouble a BBEG. The difference between a 3rd and a 15th level character is enormous. So adventure design tends to lean towards a linear adventure progression. You don't want the 4th level characters stumbling into the 9th level adventure because that's a TPK waiting to happen. So you fight goblins, then ghouls, then ogres, then giants etc you don't want to meet a couple of giants when you should be fighting ghouls!

5e seems to have a less steep improvement curve, meaning that at 4th level if you wander into the 9th level dungeon you can survive ( probably only long enough to get out). So this means you can make the world a bit more sandboxy, let the players find their own way. Now maybe this will just lead to the players having a false sense of their ability to defeat a big threat.

Now that I look back on it when 3.0 came out I started running essentially much more linear adventure path style campaigns. I like the story element of the game anyway. Maybe now I will try a bit more sandbox.

Like I said I admit I haven't had much experience with 5e but that's my thoughts .

Yep, if a player gets the best protective magical items in the game, and take the right class options and spells, they have a really high Armour Class and are hard to hit - same as it ever was.

(Off topic 1: I recall from one edition the write up of Grazzt was that he could hit any Armour Class on a natural roll of 13 or higher, I thought it was a cool ability to get past the uber munchkin AC fiends)

( off topic 2: GWL - what do you consider are the most crucial elements of 4e style play ( or any other edition) that are not replicated, or able to be replicated in 5e? - I don't know 4e well but for mine:
1. unlike in in 1-3e a high level character is not able to wade through an army of goblins or orcs with impunity ( I guess unless you are that uber high AC guy?) and;
2. that unlike 3e the best way to defeat the BBG threatening your city is not necessarily to wander off into the nearby caves, kill a bunch of stuff, level up 5 times gain a heap of enhancement stuff, then come back a fortnight later and crush it.
.....but I think that these are good things)

As for the list of info from the DMG it is too scarce to influence me one way or the other - but the PHB and MM have been enough to make me look forward to the DMG.

Sissyl wrote:

But according to their plan, you would then not have more Spelljammer products at all. Would this affect your willingness to invest those 10-40$?

I did plan on getting their stuff. I have gotten the PHB, MM and HotDQ. But if they intend what seems to be the case here (wringing what money they can out of well-known brands with no intention of supporting them after the initial two or three books), they can do just fine without my money.

I don't agree that that is their stated plan. Their plan as I understand it is to release 2 stories a year - with some support for each story. That doesn't mean once a story is released they will not touch the setting again, or that they will not allow 3pp to do so, or that there will be no other source of new adventures for that setting.

But, hypothetically, if they released a Spelljammer story - with the support they have referred to and only that - nothing more & all 3pp support or future module support for that setting prohibited into the future. I would be less interested than if they produced a swathe of new material. But if it was a good enough story & I wanted to run it I might buy the background stuff. It's pretty good value.

But that wasn't my point - my point was in response to you saying they are planning to "start" a setting then abandon it. They ain't starting any of those settings, they are adding stories to settings that already exist, the settings already have stories. If you liked the old ones you can convert them to 5e and here are some new stories - some new support for an old setting.

During the time of 4e iirc the old settings weren't available online. Now they are. That makes a difference as to what WOTC need to do with a setting. Then they needed to entirely explain and support the setting. Now they just need to add to a setting. It's already there.

Sissyl wrote:

So, instead of settings... we're getting "storylines" consisting of a player guide, a DM guide, and an adventure book... BLEAH. Didn't they learn sodding ANYTHING from the debacles of their 4th edition launches of Forgotten Realms and Dark Sun, which followed exactly this pattern?

Apparently not. Either you start new settings because you intend to support them, or you do it because you can squeeze a little more money out of a well known brand. Well, it makes the decision not to support the crap so much easier. *smirks*

See, from my point of view, I don't think that WOTC need to "start" the setting of Spelljammer. It was already started 20+ years ago. They just need to make the background stuff available online (which they largely have). To throw support behind it now they need to release a conversion guide (which they say they will), maybe have a small Spelljammer 5e guide, then release a players guide with some mechanical stuff and some fluff and an adventure showcasing the setting including some GM appropriate stuff.

As far as support after ( or before) that is concerned - modules ( either from WOTC or more likely 3p) and the sort of material that used to be in Dungeon & Dragon magazines (digital if that fits the economic model) would be what I would want.

Don't get me wrong if I was a big Spelljammer fan I would want them to produce lots of Spelljammer stuff ( that's what fans want). I am more a Greyhawk fan and I could start a classic Greyhawk campaign right now - without anything more from WOTC ( though I would like the DMG, more monster manuals and a conversion guide - but I don't need any more greyhawk setting stuff - it's out there).

They also don't need to start Darksun, Ravenloft Dragonlance or birthright either. ( let's face it hoard of the dragon queen could probably be adapted to dragonlance post war of the lance pretty easily.)

I have never played or owned Spelljammer in my life, but if a 5e adventure I was interested In came out I could fork out between $10 and $40 at rpgnow and get a chunk of it. Then I would know the setting and could run it.

Just thinking of some of the 1st edition white dwarf & dragon classes
Houri for the bard
Bandit for the rogue
Elementalist for the sorcerer or maybe warlock.

Night below: it is suitable for young people. The first book is above ground. It has some straightforward quests, the village is ok but the main plot is obscure and not really discovered until later. Then into books 2 & 3 where the exploration is fun but can be a bit of a grind. Again the main plot is revealed layer by layer. By the time you find the missing girl I guarantee you have forgotten you were looking for her. Like any big adventure it will need tweaks along the way to fit your group.

I agree with Misroi, if you are in for the long haul it's a great plot and pretty well done. The first 3.0 campaign I ran was a converted Night Below campaign. It lasted 6 years and went to level 20. Awesome.

Thanks all.

I agree that I could probably just rerun it without changes. I have been having a bit of a look at some of the story v adventure elements and will probably make a few changes to mix it up for those with long memories. I think putting in a couple of side quests will help.

About 3 years ago a campaign I was playing in fell apart for a variety of non game reasons. We had played shackled city up to about the battle in the town where the masons are. Anyway I would like to run it now with some of the same players, starting from the beginning but I am happy to make some changes so the people who went through it don't get bored ( although to be fair the secret plot was still pretty much a secret).

Any suggestions for tweaks to the early parts to make it replayable ?

Mikaze wrote:
graywulfe wrote:
Where are we getting the idea that Mummy's Mask is not going to be a "normal" one.

I'm in this boat too.

I mean, the stuff mentioned about Mummy's Mask seems pretty firmly in line with stuff like ** spoiler omitted **

And those honestly fit into the spectrum of "standard" fantasy for me.

(has also been playing Final Fantasy IV on DS lately, so...)

Perhaps I am wrong about the Mummy's Mask.

I recognise that there is a proportion of standard fantasy in the AP line especially early ( I think I said that) and I hope I didn't come across as strident criticism of the non standard. It's not of use to me, but so be it. I just want to express my opinion that standard fantasy is my preference. I don't believe you need to put pistols or lasers into fantasy to make it a fresh and interesting story. For me that is a true rarity, a 1 in 100 adventure, not a 1 in 2 or 3

Shisumo wrote:

Altogether, about half of the adventure paths that have been published since Paizo went solo fall into the broad category of "fairly standard fantasy exploration discovery story." Yes, to a certain extent, this has been slanted somewhat away from that experience in the last few years - but that's because it's already been done. Several times. Paizo needs to keep breaking new ground so it doesn't stagnate.

I truly hope that Paizo doesn't believe that it has already done the standard fantasy exploration ideas several times over so now they need to put guns, robots or ray beams into the fantasy so they don't stagnate.

Pushing boundaries is fine but witch war, wrath of righteous, now mummy's mask ( which I had thought was the 'normal' one after a couple of odd ones and before Iron Gods - but that looks wrong) then Iron gods all seem to fit this ott or hi tech twist category. It's no longer a fresh twist if it happens every time. I guess I am just one of the people who isn't yet bored with normal swords and spells adventure fantasy.

I am looking forward to the post Iron Gods AP ( fingers crossed) and will give Emerald spire a look too.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Moreland wrote:

Imagine you build up a fantasy character—a wizard, let's say—who's all about researching the ruins of ancient civilizations to discover lost knowledge that no one else in the world knows. Researching arcane lore, and all that. You take that character to your GM and she thinks he will fit in the campaign, so you play the wizard for a while.

In one dungeon, you find a strange relic from the past that your PC has never heard of before. It's a brand new discovery—exactly what he wants to do. This weird item can clearly be held by a humanoid hand, but doesn't look like any weapon you've ever seen before. It doesn't radiate magic, so it's likely just some piece of ancient junk. Until you accidentally put pressure on one part of the item, and it shoots what looks to you, a wizard with maximum ranks in Spellcraft, like a scorching ray. If you could unlock this ages-old enigma, you'd be known the world over for your intellect. Heck, the device might even get named after you!

That's the end of the night, as the GM needs to work early tomorrow and the woman playing the fighter needs to make the last train home. You thank the GM for an incredible adventure, noting that you're so used to knowing every page of every rulebook that nothing seems to surprise you anymore, but that tonight you got to experience the wonder of discovery along with your character. Your GM just smiles and says knowingly, "just wait until you see what that strangely etched coin you found does."

If this book were called "Treasures of Numeria" and we hadn't told you that Numeria was home to a crashed spaceship and had laser guns and robots in it; if this product description didn't pull back the curtain and say, outright, that these are technological items one would expect to find in a science fiction setting; if a sword made of light and an invisible field of force were describes as magic instead, would there still be the same negative reactions to it?

Food for thought...

Yes, but fluff and description matter when playing a game of imagination. Describing an item as something that shoots forth a magical bolt of flame vs that emits a laser beam vs a ranged touch attack that does 4d6 fire damage mechanically may be the same but it does matter. In a game meant to be played partially in your imagination, how it's described is crucial. For some people the description that juxtaposes different genre's breaks their immersion. In this supplement you are not talking about strange magical treasures from another world you are talking about technological devices.

Now I know some people love that stuff, and importantly the creative minds at Paizo want to produce it so fine. Bring it on. I am very unlikely to use it but others will and that's fine. I hope you get it out of your system and start producing stuff that is more my speed again.

The AP's started off as being fairly standard fantasy exploration discovery stories but it seems like for some time this has been the exception rather than the norm.


1890 - 1920s style horror, Ninja quest, dimension hopping to earth, mythic monty haul adventuring. I was really looking forward to the Mummy's Mask as a return to 'standard' fantasy but I see that technology appears likely to taint that as well.

Can I request that the AP following the Iron Gods one just be a standard old fashioned no guns, no lasers, no anachronisms adventure.

Pure game mechanic fix proposed - directly related to the game mechanic problem

Light crossbow - problem : it needs a move action to reload making it poor, particularly at bab +6 or higher

Solution : the base damage for a light crossbow increases by 1d6 per +6 bab the firer has (ie +1d6 at bab+6, +2d6 at bab +12 etc) ( personally I would use an extra d8 but that might seem too much to some people)
Maybe also that at bab +1 you can reload while moving ( like drawing a weapon )

Heavy crossbow - problem : it needs a full round action to reload, making it poor

Solution : as above but make the extra dice higher ( ie d10)

In addition, and more radically, I note that in other games crossbows tend to be "armour piercing". In pathfinder that would equate to a bonus to hit, and maybe damage so maybe make crossbows have the "point blank shot" feat built into the item. This gives everyone who uses them a bonus to hit and damage and enables them to just take precise shot etc more easily

( disclaimer - I play 3.5 not pathfinder so some rule nuance may be lost on me, I apologise for any associated errors)

Thanks for the reply shadow born. I didn't make myself clear. I am the GM - when I say I have a PC I mean one of the PC's I am running is a Calistria cleric.

I have read through the material and it seems that the drow all worship demon lords & only demon lords, as a society, I am sure there are individuals that worship outlier deities but demon lords seems to be their thing.

So I was wondering what the canon is ( & others thought) about drow worshipping Calistria.

Do drow in Zirnakaynin only worship demon lords?

How about ones from other cities?

Do some also worship calistria and nethys like normal elves?

I have a PC disguised as a drow who is a cleric of calistria - can that remain or does he need to pretend to worship a demon lord to openly be a cleric?

I am back and getting ready for my next all weekend session in 3 weeks time. The usual group is being joined by a couple of extra players brining the numbers up to 9 pc's so I am going to have to adjust the encounters a bit. More open plan fighting, increase the numbers and hit points of foes, less small group roleplaying or investigative stuff. This means I will change the emphasis of Endless Night, but I think I was going to anyway.

So here are my thoughts for changes to the rest of the path. I have no doubt some of this will change when the session actually starts but the main stuff will stick. My thoughts are a bit disorganised but I will try and put some of them down...

First the Winter Council, how it all went pear shaped and how they are now.
1. They were always secretive and focused on information gathering as that was the course of their greatest triumph - uncovering the impending Earthfall event.
2. About 50 years ago their contacts at Mordants Spire recovered some arcane secrets from an Aboleth residence ( the finding of this knowledge was assisted by Abraxas' servant Alistraxia)
3 Allevrah was in charge of investigating the secrets and they turned out to be about Earthfall, and to be plant a seed of corruption.
4. Hialin helped Allevrah when she needed it and was infected with the corruption as well, but with slower maturity
5. Initially Allevrah was going to use the Earthfall to crush Treerazer's army ( not the drow, she didn't really care that much about them)
6. 10 years ago Allevrah killed Auramesties - who was the principal liaison with the crown, amongst other things - and turned, and fled.
7. The winter council having lost it's 2 most active members fell into stunned depressive decline and have been that way ever since.
8. Meanwhile about 40 years ago Treerazer employed Quilindira to infiltrate the winter council.
9. She did this successfully and now is an advisor to Lord Villastir ( she hasn't been found out yet) - who is the commander of the Rath
10. Using her charms she had already effectively convinced Villastir to issue the odd order on his own - with the Winter Council going mysteriously quiet Villastir believes that he has to step into the breach ( this belief is partially ego and partially subtle manipulation by Q).
11. For the last 10 years the Rath has been going in more and more dangerous missions and losing a fair bit of strength.

So back at Celwynvian
1. I am not going to have the elf gate even exist in the academy. I don't like the idea of elf gates existing in the Darklands at all.
2. Instead the drow have their own version of elf gates - called the demon web which is partially a creation of Mazzmezz ( I am foreshadowing the Harrowing from Dungeon 84 here).
3. The demon web entrance is a distance from Celwynvian in the mountains.
4. Allevrah has all she needs from the Armageddon echo and has left for bigger things, but the drow use the echo to hide from the elven assaults and wait them out. If they could just nick off back to the darklands instead for a bit of r&r why wouldn't they?
5. The main drow that are left want to control Celwynvian, and do some more experiments.
6. So it is important for the drow to keep the echo gateway able to be opened. That's what the Vrock is for and why he was bound to the academy.
7. Q , who will take the place of Laveth in the Harrowing scenario wants to absorb the echo plane as part of her ploy to take over part of the demon web - so she wants the drow gone and the the heroes gone. ( she will later want to capture Perelir as a sacrifice to complete the harrowing.

In drow land
1. This will be less Vonnarc and more all in
2. Azrinae is hiring as their forces are depleted
3 Vonnarc is hiring potential Azrinae double agents to get a look at their books
4. From these sources the party can learn - the winter council has a drow informing mole ( but not who it is) that has helped the drow ambush the Rath ( it's Q) - allevrah has gone to the land of black blood - she plans to nuke Kyonin - they don't know how to stop it - she got the knowledge before she came here - she got the knowledge about how to nuke it ( and presumably disarm the nuke) by infiltrating the winter council.

The elf queen
1 Will not act like a ditzy goose but will enquire openly why Auremesties hasn't been seen for a while
2. Hopefully the finger will be pointed at Lord V ( an innocent patsy - if a bit annoying)

Anyway that's a fair bit of my planned big picture changes - I hope the party ends up rescuing Perelir from Q in the harrowing before going to the land of the black blood. And eventually replaces the now useless Winter Council : )

Now to work on the small picture encounters

Please cancel just the rpg subscription.

I will keep the adventure path & module subscription.


YogoZuno wrote:
Very interesting take on the AP - did they interact with the librarian in the sphere at all?

They met him, but didn't interact with him much. initially they tried to discuss the drow and so on, but once they realized his knowledge stopped prior to earth fall they just asked about the identification of various buildings and the like.

Do you have any suggestions about how to get the most out of him?

They will have further interaction I expect once they enter the Armageddon Echo. They also saw the blacksmith ghost in the graveyard but too were caught up in hunting for the huecava's lair to follow.

All part of the stuff I have to make sure they recall when next we play.

1 to 50 of 873 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.