Entombed with the Pharoahs - yay desert adventure
I haven't read some of the very newest stuff, but those were my favs so far. I have run 3 (kobold king, seven swords, crucible of chaos) of the 5 with my weekly group, and the adventures proved fun for all.
Paizo had a great big sign outside their playroom displaying some of the great WAR art from PF. Every time I walked past the PFS room between 8AM and 5PM (4h games at 8am and 1pm), the place was electric. A buddy and I played Silent Tide on the second session of second day. Mike Kortez was our GM, so he knew his stuff (and did a great job).
The module was a blast.
Spoiler:
It's very undead heavy. At one point my cleric used his Sun domain power to wipe out about 9 undead. Super cool level 1 hax. :D Anyway, thanks Mike and other members of the PC group. You guys were great and I had a good time running around Absolom with ya. Thanks Paizo for making PFS a reality!
Wolfgang Baur wrote:
The spells are good. Buoyancy is especially funny as an offensive spell. Remind me of downdraft|updraft as used against dragons and the like. "Goodbye, Mr. Shark. Better luck next time!"
The Benthic Serpent was rad, and the plot hooks around it were better. I also enjoyed the art of the duel piece. I have no plans to run anything where it might come up, but the history included was the appropriate amount, and the story bit at the start of the article set a great tone. Anyway, I like it, and 6 bucks is a great price.
Jib wrote: But you get more back ground material in the module... right? There are many hooks in the module, but I think the information specifically on Kaer Maga is 2 or 3 pages at best. If you get this, expect to do a little legwork of your own to flesh out the city. That said, Kaer Maga is my second favourite fantasy city after Ptolus even with the sparse amount of knowledge given out. Also, the adventure is super cool.
steelwhisper wrote: I would say that we have to include the social encounters in the module total. I read that the expectation is that in 4E a party will level after 10-12 encounters. We are probably not going to have a good insight into this until the DMG4E comes out where the social encounter system is explained. I was reading through PF1 last night and there are many points where there's an obvious social encounter and a pre-figured skill challenge (as they exist in 3.5). For example, the Shopkeeper's Daughter gives XP equivalent to smashing a CR2 creature. There are some others in Part 2 of the adventure that don't have any XP value attached. I assume making them into skill challenges wouldn't be a huge challenge. Anyway, I agree that there probably should be some social challenge action in any conversion.
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
You're killing any enthusiasm I had for helping do conversions. That said, I still have a little left over and I think there's probably a place for something similar to my original idea. I did a test run with the 3.5 rules and quickly learned the mapping I originally envisioned was ill-suited. I came up with something different in a spreadsheet, but it's not where it needs to be yet. The utility I got out of my experiment was a listing of all the pre-ordained points in the module where XP is given out. This is a good start on helping a DM see where XP is coming from and what the encounter levels are like throughout the module. Let me give an example (from memory, calculations are at home.):
Adapting this to 4e wouldn't be hard, and having variations for all the different flavours that are developed would be as simple as adding another row to a spreadsheet. Assuming some sort of wiki, one could just add his own conversion entry to the list and a quick identification of why it is unique. We could also remove expected levels bits because we know 4e is based on a static XP for level x monsters, regardless of party level. Anyway, if there's no perceived value from anyone, I'll just drop this idea entirely. :)
It's all headed to the same endpoint. A graph of the paths a party can take wouldn't be too hard to create. Label nodes with expected levels, possible sidequests, etc. I always wanted something like that for an AP. If I have time tomorrow, I will throw something together that maps Burnt Offerings under 3.5 rules to demonstrate.
erian_7 wrote:
This all sounds Really cool. For some reason, this reminds me of the chase mechanics Paizo has presented in... PF7? Anyway, I may run a test night with non-static initiatives.Any chance you will give a go at adapting the rules for the interrupts and dynamic initiative to work in 3e town?
erian_7 wrote:
I think one could use this idea to build a handy sub-system to have in place for certain adventure types. Cthulhu/Horror/Pulp/etc. would be modelled very well by splitting HP across physical|mental. Yes, HP is an abstraction, but why not have two abstractions? :) Anyway, it's a cool idea. I'm not so hot on the spiritual health, though I guess you could model how close to living one's god's ideal. Maybe give you x Spritual HP, and when you hit zero, your alignment changes, you lose spells, or you need atonement (or all of the above). The tie-in to stats is interesting. too. I think it would work better in DnD terms to be able to "burn" stats to recharge your HP and then get restoration and what have you for at least the mental and physical HP. Good stuff.
M Computer Programmer 4
Majuba wrote:
Yeah, I had a lot of of lightly splashed skills. The +2 cha helped the spellcasting, so not a big thing. I mostly just lost my profession skill(s). Can't remember if I had one or two, but I had zero after the skill change. :/
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
Unfortunately, I think most companies that would freely host this thing might have similar clauses. Maybe we could get DMTools to host it if Paizo will not?
Mormegil wrote:
(4/module) :D It may turn out that high level magic is total shenanigans in 4e, which might make some of the BBEGs a lower|higher level encounter. I really do think we'll have to wait until we see a PHB|DMG|MM. I know some of the thinking in 4E is designing creatures with a small set of cool abilities, but that really does seem to do a big disservice to some of the bad dudes in the last couple of ROTRL modules. I think it would be handy to put out a "Bad Guy as PC" sidebar alongside a simplified stat block for some of the baddies. I fully admit this is because I don't want to see the big bads neutered like 4E dragons (where's my spellz?!), though I could probably be convinced otherwise if the simplified stat block was... compelling. Also, my current stance is I'm not planning on converting to 4E, but I hope I can help those who do want to.
M Computer Programmer 4
Always a fight when you come up to the other scribes' waists. As long as I get a bit of the ear. Hope he hasn't been carrying it around too long. They do get soggy in the moisture from the Jaggere! That jerk Kettering had better not keep me back from the food today. One of these days I'll show him a little something he's not expecting.
Mormegil wrote: Another think that I noticed is that the RoTR is made for up to four 16 level characters. Having in mind that fourth edition is designed till lvl 30, I am wondering whether we should decide up to which lvl the conversion will take the PCs. My guess is this will be sort of difficult to do before we see more monsters/the PHB/etc. Based on math alone... 22-24 would probably be the right range. Spoiler: Can't wait to see what you cats do with Karzoug. >:D
Daeglin wrote:
Google Docs is indeed pretty good. I like it less for formatting than something like wikimedia. Important terms for google docs fromTOS:8.2 You should be aware that Content presented to you as part of the Services, including but not limited to advertisements in the Services and sponsored Content within the Services may be protected by intellectual property rights which are owned by the sponsors or advertisers who provide that Content to Google (or by other persons or companies on their behalf). You may not modify, rent, lease, loan, sell, distribute or create derivative works based on this Content (either in whole or in part) unless you have been specifically told that you may do so by Google or by the owners of that Content, in a separate agreement. 11.2 You agree that this licence includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services. 11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this licence shall permit Google to take these actions.
Gary Teter wrote: Over the past few days I've made a whole bunch of changes to the website software aimed at improving performance. Is it performing better for you now? Have seen a lot less request queueing (that's what it seemed like, at least). Things generally seem snappier today. Your foo is strong, sir. Haven't lost any posts today, either. Are you still the only software guy at Paizo?
CEBrown wrote:
Excellent. That made my day. :)
DMcCoy1693 wrote:
Emphasis mine. I'm stealing that, whether it was on purpose or not. :D
Stolen from [url=http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/general/worldContentInTheRulebook[/url]
Erik Mona wrote:
Clearly it's still more than a year out, but at what frequency do you expect to publish splat books for the RPG line? One thing I loathed about the 3.5 cycle was the sheer volume of stuff coming out of WotC. Made it nearly impossible to keep up as a DM. Additionally, will your non-core books be going through open phases like we see with the alpha rpg? Will the content be OGL? Hopefully the answer to both of those is "Heck yeah!" :)
Keith Richmond wrote:
I think it's an effect of not making them a different kind of minion. I don't think it's especially tough for a 4e level 1. The guys in the 3.5 version seem like 1 trick ponies who will get creamed by PCs. These guys do not. Keith Richmond wrote:
I think I would rather have sustained randomness (i.e. some goblin just gets set on fire), but what you have is probably more fair to the monsters side. I may revise this opinion when we see what grenade weapon rules look like. ;) Keith Richmond wrote:
I agree with your logic here. Most of my comments might be coming from not seeing this torchbearer and his minions all at once. You've explained this stuff well and convinced me. It's the kind of stuff I would want to see in a sidebar, actually. :D
M Computer Programmer 4
Majuba wrote:
Can one have a "dabbled cross-class"? Anyway, not opposed to trying anything. Additionally, maybe you should suggest this in the alpha feedback forum, Jack? Maybe you already have and I missed it. There are ever so many threads.
pres man wrote:
If the excitement is there for "spiritual" conversions of the source material, that is probably where it will end up. Always easier to get stuff when people are excited about it, right? I agree that use of sidebars would be keen both as a "why this is a good fit for 4e" and a "here's a way to change it up to make it closer to the original". As for encouraging the purchase of modules and referencing them, all (afaik) the Pathfinders and Modules have easy reference numbers (e.g. B1, C2, etc.) and I'm guessing a good way to go about it might be something like this: Section Q2
Sidebar
Just my take on how things might be handled.
nullPlanet Stories Subscriber
Sebastian wrote: http://www.avclub.com/content/topics/The_Box_Of_Paperbacks_Book_Club M agic linky thing... ACTIVATED!
Keith Richmond wrote:
These guys seem really tough to me (based on the tactics section in the PF1 book). That doesn't mean I don't like them. :) That said, I don't really like how pyromaniac works. Maybe rolling 2 attacks per ability (?) is common in 4e monsters. I need to go and look at the big list I have again. Anyway, I would suggest just making the torch hit a random goblin adjacent to the original target or to just use the attack bonus rolled the first time and leave it "random goblin in range". There's also no rule about the dogslicer breaking on a 1, which would cause the goblin to flee in terror. Thanks, Keith.
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
I agree with you completely. My suggestion would have been better placed in a "Spice up your goblin raid!" thread in the RotRL forums. At least it brought the issue to light, though!
Dario Nardi wrote:
That's great! I'm not gonna buy it again... but that's great!
Lord Zeb wrote:
This would be 3.0 haste all over again. This would have the effect of making arcane casters EVEN better and fighters would still not keep up at high levels (unless their damage was significantly boosted).
Re: recharge mechanic.
Edit: I'm not saying this as a problem for me. I love the attrition of spells over an adventuring day. This is just a solution that might or might not work.
Clerics can burn spell for cure or inflict. Maybe wizards and sorcerers should be able to burn spells for straight up damage. This would require a few new spells|feats|class features and I would see it as a strictly optional thing. It would be nice to be a wizard and say "oops, I don't need fog cloud right now. Burn for 2d4 <x> damage".
Krome wrote:
I like you're fifteenth level attack round above. I don't know how good it would be against anyone with any AC... It's certainly exciting, though! As to this question, it generally comes down to how hard the DM is on people. If he lets your casters get away with it (or if no one in the party minds) then I it will happen. If it's a problem, your group just needs to come up with something to *make* the casters choose. Egg timer, loss of turn, etc. I've played a high level caster and for me I usually had 4 or 5 spells "on deck" and would pick one when my time came up. Getting through all the effects a high level spell can have is a completely different can of worms. Books like Complete Mage added at will abilities for wizards. I know it has helped a lot for our group to have reliable damage from our caster with no complicated effects. He can basically sit back and lob damage and bring out the funky spells as necessary.
|