Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Adventure Card Game Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Adventures Pathfinder Campaign Setting Pathfinder Player Companion Pathfinder Accessories Pathfinder Miniatures Pathfinder Fiction Pathfinder® Society™ Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatible Products Pathfinder Apparel & Gifts Pathfinder Licensed Products
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Pathfinder Society Scenario #3-08: Among the Gods (PFRPG) PDF

***( )( ) (based on 8 ratings)

Our Price: $3.99

Add to Cart
Facebook Twitter Email

A Pathfinder Society Scenario designed for Levels 3–7.

The Pathfinder Society sends the PCs to the mountaintop mausoleum and monument known as Antios's Crown in search of a long-lost relic believed to be contained there, but all is not as it seems. Can the Pathfinders survive the denizens of the remote mountain complex and the sinister plot of a powerful cultists who plans revenge on the Society that has foiled their plans one too many times?

Written by Michael Kenway.

This scenario is designed for play in Pathfinder Society Organized Play, but can easily be adapted for use with any world. This scenario is compliant with the Open Game License (OGL) and is suitable for use with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.

Product Availability


Fulfilled immediately. Will be added to your My Downloads Page immediately upon purchase of PDF.

Are there errors or omissions in this product information? Got corrections? Let us know at webmaster@paizo.com.

PZOPSS0308E


See Also:

Product Reviews (8)
1 to 5 of 8 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

***( )( ) (based on 8 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

short, but fun

****( )

Although this is thematically linked to the other two "among the" scenarios, it's actually substantially funnier if the characters in question *haven't* done the first two scenarios, IMO.


Least scenario, definitely not a must-play

**( )( )( )

My perspective on this scenario is as a player. For reference, I played it in the higher tier (6-7). Be warned, spoilers will follow!

I didn't like the scenario very much, to be honest. While the background elements on what's going on are present, the plot is not likely to be understood by players unless the GM does many extra efforts to emphasize certain clues. When I GM or write a scenario, I always make sure my players can understand what's going on with some exposure... there is none here, unfortunately.

As for the mechanics, I didn't like the thin air rule at all. We spent the entire last fight doing double moves for 10'', because of the continuous fatigued condition and difficult terrain.

I definitely don't recommend this scenario, there are others that are far better.

Story: 2/5
Roleplay: 1/5
Encounters: 2/5
Mechanics: 2/5

Total: 2/5


***( )( )

Yikes! This scenario is simple enough and the faction missions are easy but the combat is easily deadly. I almost lost my bard to the first combat. (We played at the higher tier.) The scenario kept me engaged, mainly because of fear my character might croak if I didn't stay on my toes, but it was a lot of fun. My group had fun with a lot of inter-party role play and the big bad at the end was delightfully cheesy and fun to hurl insults at. Overall I would recommend this scenario.


SIMPLE & LETHAL

***( )( )

Dull as a premise, but quite challenging in a mechanical sense / numbers game

plus the

Spoiler:
who are you moment at the end

Good to run on those low energy evenings when you need some good rolls to keep you going and want some touch and go encounters

this mod can run very quick


Great for promoting interfaction conflict, nail-biting combat/traps

****( )

Played on 5-6 tier.

Scenario is below average for plot, and doesn't do a very good job of conveying to the party why they are doing what they are doing and what it's effects are.

The scenario makes up for this with great scenery description, very intimidating traps (I pretended the rockslide trap was a save or die and only revealed the ledge after the party looked over the edge of the cliff), and some good, but challenging combat.

The scenario also does a good job of promoting interfaction conflict, with a couple missions having a "get caught and fail" component, and some others being outright suicidal. There's also some room for DM creativity, and you'll need to use it as there is some vague stuff to be had. It was fun watching the players screw each other over for once (albeit accidentally).

The scenario could have benefited from a less useless end guy: I spent the monologue hoping the party would shoot him mid-speech, and the combat watching him get rolled. Meanwhile, the scenario never truly conveys why he is actually relevant.

In all, fun scenario: I would definitely run it again.


1 to 5 of 8 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.