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 #3-22: The Rats of Round Mountain—Part II: Pagoda of the Rat (PFRPG) PDF

***( )( ) (based on 7 ratings)

Our Price: $3.99

Add to Cart
Facebook Twitter Email

A Pathfinder Society Scenario designed for Levels 7–11.

In the hollow center of Round Mountain, the Pathfinder Society's crack team of special agents must navigate the so-called Pagoda of the Rat, where the influential ratfolk of the region hold court. Can they break up negotiations between the ratfolk and the sinister Aspis Consortium, or will the risks taken to reach this point have been in vain? The future of the Pathfinder Society's viability in the region lies in the PCs' hands.

"Pagoda of the Rat" is the second and final scenario in the two-part The Rats of Round Mountain campaign arc. The story begins in Pathfinder Society Scenario #3–20: The Rats of Round Mountain—Part I: The Sundered Path. Both chapters are intended to be played in order and consecutively; PCs who do will receive a special reward at the arc's conclusion.

Written by Russ Taylor.

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.

PZOPSS0322E


See Also:

Product Reviews (7)
1 to 5 of 7 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Average product rating:

***( )( ) (based on 7 ratings)

Sign in to create or edit a product review.

Why bother

*( )( )( )( )

Finally got to play this module, at high tier. The second encounter does not feel like it's appropriately balanced. We had a group of experienced players and a good mix of skills/classes but were shown all corners of the room. I cannot judge the lower tier gameplay, but at higher tier it would save time by just letting all players spend PA/cash for a resurrection, fill in the chronicle and not waste hours.


Worst Module Ever

*( )( )( )( )

It takes a lot to qualify for the title of Worst Module ever, but since I have been playing organized play scenarios since the early days of Living City, I feel qualified in making that assessment.

1. Yet another trite module with monsters which can see in the dark and casting darkness. It was new and challenging once, but after a half dozen occurrences, the editors should be sending these encounters to be rewritten. It's so bad that my barbarian/oracle of battle/rage prophet has used a 3rd level spell slot for Daylight.

2. This is the first organized play scenario where I got absolutely no XP going back 20 over years to living city days. Why? Because we spent four hours on the second encounter (see #1). This is utterly assinine. We only saw two encounters out of the whole module. That's certainly a waste of player, author and editor time.

3. People play PFS to have fun. Beating your head against the table for hours due to a poorly designed encounter is not fun. To make matters worse, we were forced to play up due to the arbitrary PFS rules.

4. We had two PCs die (not mine) and the judge ruled that they were consumed by the rakshasa several levels above and were unrecoverable. If we'd waited a day, maybe, but not a 10 minute withdrawl to heal and buff up before returning.

I haven't read the module and I suspect that I would have enjoyed it far more with another judge, but due to the PFS rules I can not play it again even though I have only seen a fraction of the module. The Pathfinder Society needs to come up with a method of rating judges, because a poor judge makes a good module bad and a bad module worse.


A Strong Finish to a Great Series!

****( )

This scenario provided a lot of depth and was a reasonable second parter. As a player I felt like there were options and diversity to the encounters. Combats were cleverly designed and if caught unprepared a party could be in a world of hurt.


A good ending for the series

****( )

I enjoyed GMing this scenario for a number of reasons - The types of encounters were very challenging, both for the players and for the GM to understand. I had to do MUCH more research than normal to be prepared to run certain encounters. I actually enjoyed this because I learned much more about some new topics. The bad guys were built well enough to give them plenty of fun options during combat. The story was still a little weak for roleplaying, but there are at least three times you can push the RP envelope for the group. It took us a solid 4 hours to complete the scenario. They zipped through a few of the encounters that saved time and nobody had a faction mission thanks to playing them in order and not returning. The faction missions looked to be interesting enough if you had to use them. We all enjoyed the scenario and the interesting boon that came with it. Good job!


Standard fare

***( )( )

I have mixed feelings about Pagoda. On one hand we had a great time (it was mostly because of the players). On the other hand I didn't find the scenario itself very memorable. Too much time was spent by my GM drawing maps.

The combats were balanced but not memorable overall. We actually ended up bypassing all of the encounters except for two combat encounters. I'm honestly not sure how anyone finishes either Rats 1 or 2 on time if you're not diplomatic. Luckily, most groups have a diplomacy monkey, so it isn't an issue.

Detailed Rating:

Length: Long. We finished in 5 hours, bypassing most combat encounters with our diplomacy monkey.
Experience: Player with 5 well built PCs at subtier 7-8.
Sweet Spot: TBD.
Entertainment: Entertaining just because of the open roleplay aspect, so it will depend on the players. For that reason, has the potential to crash and burn with stonefaced players. (7/10)
Roleplay: Open ended roleplay. Hard to assess based on my GM alone. (6/10)
Combat/Challenges: It was OK but not memorable. It's possible my GM wasn't prepared and didn't do it justice. (6/10)
Maps: The maps might have been good, however for GMs that like to draw everything on blank flip maps with sharpees, it takes too long and is often confusing. A lot of the session was spent on maps. (4/10)
Boons: A powerful but situational boon that will be appreciated by some players. I guess if you're going to reward boons like this it should be in the upper tiers. (10/10)
Uniqueness: There were a few tricks. (7/10)
Faction Missions: We didn't get faction missions, so that was welcome change and it made sense. (8/10)

Overall: The scenario was 'OK'. (6/10)


1 to 5 of 7 << 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.