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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Pathfinder Society Scenario #33: Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible SPOILER


Pathfinder Society GM Discussion

1 to 50 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Illinois—Decatur aka TwilightKnight

I wasn't sure if this thread should be here or on the product boards or perhaps the GM board...

In reading the scenario I see two errors that may warrant correction.

spoiler:

The text in Act2:A states there are four archers, but at the bottom of page 9, it says, "...and alert the other four archers." Makes it sound as if there is a total of five archers.

The chronicle erroneously lists this as a tier 7-8 or 10-11 in the Items Found During This Scenario section.

**

Moved to the correct forum. Thanks for pointing out the chronicle error. I'll correct that today.

Shadow Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In act one, the box text reads "They are camped exactly on the ambush site described in Waman’s itinerary."

What ambush is described in Waman's itinerary? I don't get why this is revealed to the players this way. They know they're going to be ambushed -- the plan counts on it -- but do they know where? Does Waman reveal to them that he's setting them up for an ambush? I'm confused.

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The intent here is that Waman gives the PCs a map of the road they need to take including an itinerary of where to stop and so on. At this stop, the PCs are pretty sure this is where they'll be ambushed, and when they get there they find the Thakur's men camped in the ambush spot, further complicating the plan.

Qadira **

As a side note the Osirion faction mission handout makes no reference to stealth being necessary to complete the secondary mission. The mod however states that if the players are observed while completing the mission they fail.

This raises 2 questions...

Should it just be assumed that stealth is always required when completing missions?

Is it even possible to trick a member of another faction using bluff for example to assist you in your mission if it is a secret one?

**

When you say secondary, are you talking about the statue mission?

Spoiler:
Because it reads on page 12:
"PCs of the Osirion faction need to search the statues (Perception DC 15) to find the statue that venerates Banafrit. They then need to find some
way to whisper into the statue’s left ear, “In greatness, for Pharaoh,” at which point the statue will rumble and click—but nothing happens. At this point, PCs of the Osirion faction will need to succeed on a DC 15 Disable Device check to remove the head. This mission can only be accomplish in this order. The head weighs 20 pounds."

This entry and the faction mission summary on page 17 and the faction handout on page 19 don't mention stealth at all.

Qadira **

Joshua J. Frost wrote:

When you say secondary, are you talking about the statue mission?

** spoiler omitted **

Yes the GM I guess took the perception check as an opposed check to not being detected by other party members not as a check to locate the correct statue.

Since then there was no stealth needed could we solicate someone with the disable device feat to assist?

**

Sure.

Spoiler:
"Oh, hey there Taldan Bob, opposed faction rogue, that head up there looks mighty nice and I think I want it for my collection. Can you hop up there and detach it for me? I would, but I'm not skilled at this sort of thing and might unduly damage the statue."

Qadira **

Joshua J. Frost wrote:

Sure.

** spoiler omitted **

Cool it has become a favorite past time in NY to trick other faction into completing your missions.

My all time favorite will always be how we convinced the Andoran Paladin that a poison provided to complete a Qadira mission was an oil of bless weapon. Good times

Shadow Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The Taldor faction player in my group was very angry about his mission. He felt like the mission text didn't really suggest or sufficiently hint at the significance of the statues to the completion of his task. I would suggest that DM's tell their Taldor players "are you *sure* you don't have anything else you want to do here before moving on?" They might need the extra help. My guy got another shot at the mission during the wrap-up, but he was already miffed and letting him try a roll at the end didn't really satisfy him.

I also found that 5 second level characters can pretty much sleep-walk through the combat encounters in this mod. One particular tweak might make the combat better at any tier...

Spoiler:
When the players get to the basement, the monk and guards can be posted in the big 'ol room to the south instead of in the cells to the east. In the cells they're kinda stuffed if any of the players can close to the hallway first. In the training room they're able to spread out a bit more and the battle would be much more dynamic. Otherwise that big room seems to be a lot of wasted space. Also the optional encounter could spice things up without overpowering them because of the conditions under which is does or doesn't pursue.

Taldor *

The "ambush site" boxed text was also confusing to my GM when we played last night. We just scratched our heads and moved on.

Also, the two Taldor faction players in our group (including me) were a bit miffed over the second faction mission. I haven't read the pdf, but according to my GM there was only one way to succeed, and it required a pretty obscure skill check -- two characteristics I'd really rather not see in faction feats. They don't have to be easy, by any means, but ideally it would be nice to see some room for creative solutions. (Along the same lines, Baron Jacquo Dalsine really needs to learn the appropriate use of "smash it up and bring me the pieces" versus "discern how it functions and then carefully dissasemble it". Some barbarians might get confused.)

To avoid sounding overly critical, let me say that I enjoyed the overall scenario and appreciated the interesting roleplay options/solutions that were included. :)

Shadow Lodge *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Elora wrote:
Also, the two Taldor faction players in our group (including me) were a bit miffed over the second faction mission. I haven't read the pdf, but according to my GM there was only one way to succeed, and it required a pretty obscure skill check

There was only one opportunity to complete the mission, yes, but a couple of possible ways of solving it. The problem was that it's just not reasonable to expect the player to recognize the opportunity when it comes along, in this case; it's too difficult by half unless the DM really lingers on it.

Qadira *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kwixson wrote:
Elora wrote:
Also, the two Taldor faction players in our group (including me) were a bit miffed over the second faction mission. I haven't read the pdf, but according to my GM there was only one way to succeed, and it required a pretty obscure skill check
There was only one opportunity to complete the mission, yes, but a couple of possible ways of solving it. The problem was that it's just not reasonable to expect the player to recognize the opportunity when it comes along, in this case; it's too difficult by half unless the DM really lingers on it.

I'm actually said DM... and I'm not sure how there's multiple ways around solving the Taldor statue prestige mission as it specifically states:

Spoiler:
Regardless of whether or not this encounter is skipped,
give Taldor faction PCs time to study the statue and make
a DC 20 Knowledge (engineering) check. Success means
the Taldor faction PCs find the correct pieces to smash off
the statue and return to Baron Dalsine.

Seems pretty clear to me. If it were a non-PFS game I'd probably have given an opportunity for a disable device or related check to be able to do it (Or at least a base int check). But as I understand it a Knowledge check cannot be higher than a 10 unless you are trained, which essentially makes it impossible unless you have someone with the correct knowledge.

Paizo Employee ** Developer

A Taldan PC can always ask a non-Taldan to make a roll, though. They needn't tell them the actual reason for the request, and asking for outside-faction assistance has led to some great roleplaying in my experience.

Qadira *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They could... if someone else had the knowledge. Otherwise just seems like they're out of luck.

It's actually how our Osirions succeeded on their statue mission. They asked the Taldan rogue.

Taldor *

Oh sure, we ask for (and give) outside-faction assistance all the time in our group. But out of 6 PCs, no one had that particular skill. In fact, I'm 99% certain that including the session GM's society characters and everyone's back-up PCs, for a total of 11 PCs, there still wouldn't be anyone who could have tried the skill check. I'm sure if someone HAD invested in the skill, it would have been a "heck yeah, finally!" moment.

****

Elora wrote:
Oh sure, we ask for (and give) outside-faction assistance all the time in our group. But out of 6 PCs, no one had that particular skill. In fact, I'm 99% certain that including the session GM's society characters and everyone's back-up PCs, for a total of 11 PCs, there still wouldn't be anyone who could have tried the skill check. I'm sure if someone HAD invested in the skill, it would have been a "heck yeah, finally!" moment.

Taldor as a faction list bards as a good choice to play. My 2nd level bard actually made that skill check on what was admittedly a lucky roll. Since a bard cab always attempt a roll for a knowledge check I would say this faction assingment while difficult was not impossible. With 2 faction assignments per mod it is expected that there will be some failures.

Of course I do not speak for Paizo or Josh.

Qadira *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Elora wrote:
Oh sure, we ask for (and give) outside-faction assistance all the time in our group. But out of 6 PCs, no one had that particular skill. In fact, I'm 99% certain that including the session GM's society characters and everyone's back-up PCs, for a total of 11 PCs, there still wouldn't be anyone who could have tried the skill check. I'm sure if someone HAD invested in the skill, it would have been a "heck yeah, finally!" moment.

Off topic:

Spoiler:
Laur has Knowledge (Engineering) now :P Of course it won't ever be useful.

**

Starting with season 1, each faction has one rather simple assignment and one difficult assignment. The assumption for PA progression is that no one is going to get 2 PA every single time they play a scenario.

Grand Lodge ****

I have positives, negatives and suggestion(s) for thought about this scenario. I'm a fan of constructive criticism as opposed to complaints. Please take these comments as constructive.

Spoiler:

Positive: I was glad to see PCs were able to use Diplomacy to achieve the overall objective of the scenario. It mixes it up from scenarios that point Pathfinders in a direct path and everything leads to combat.

Negative: The scenario plays very short when the party has a Diplomacy buff PC. Our table finished the mod at a con in 1.5 hours. I didn't get a warm and fuzzy about it. Money is spent to attend a con. Players would like the gaming experience to last close to the 4-hour duration alloted in the slot. (This includes game days as well)

Suggestion: Include DM notes for cases when the scenario is running fast. These notes could include ideas for wandering monsters or perhaps difficult roleplay situations to engage the entire party, not just the Diplomacy buff PC (yes, other players can talk but their value to the encounter is a diplomacy roll most likely an assist to the primary diplomacy buff PC). In this scenario, as an example, after the PCs convince Zamir to join the Pathfinder Society he could ask to be escorted to Abasolom, or where ever, to 'sign up'. Along the way there are possibilities for wandering monsters or NPCs who don't want to see him switch sides.

Positive: The missions take effort to accomplish.

Negative: First, with Diplomacy shortening the mod the wizard missions became hand-waving accomplishments. Second, the statue parts mission was clumsy to accomplish. Since we made Zamir friendly the DM gave us free run of the keep. We busted up statues for the parts, which didn't seem realistic. In game, these statues have a gold piece value to construct. I don't see, roleplay-wise, NPCs letting us bust up their equipment.

Suggestion: This one is difficult. What I can say is having the overall Pathfinder objective tied to one type of approach (combat, diplomacy, etc) makes DMs scratch their heads when things go off track. This suggestion is apart from accomplishing faction missions with a Knowledge or Diplomacy check. What I mean is, if the PCs resolve a situation in the scenario using diplomacy, but the scenario is worded in such a way it suggests PCs are attempting to accomplish their faction missions after combat, or via combat, it creates issues for the DM to mitigate and PCs to succeed.

Positive:The scenario has a good mix of encounters.

Negative: PCs won't get a chance to experience the encounters. We went from Act 2 straight to the conclusion using diplomacy.

Suggestion: As an alternative, which adds to my first suggestion above, Zamir's relationship could be strained. If the party convinces him to join the Pathfinder Society perhaps there's an underlying situation that triggers. This could play out as optional if the scenario is playing fast. Perhaps a rival or rogue monk (not by class but an opportunist masquerading as a monk or maybe a monk who feels Zamir is behaving chaotic by joining the Society) takes over the monastery with a loyal crew. This results in the PCs fighting their way out, or perhaps to the basement to rescue the wizards. This will bring back all the cool stuff written in the scenario putting the slot duration back on track.

I hope the feedback was helpful for future scenarios. Or, perhaps, DMs who run it as a private game could take advantage of my notes.

Good mod, Craig. I wish my table could have experienced it cover to cover.

Grand Lodge ****

Joshua J. Frost wrote:
Starting with season 1, each faction has one rather simple assignment and one difficult assignment. The assumption for PA progression is that no one is going to get 2 PA every single time they play a scenario.

100% agree. Early in season 0 the players asked me to hand wave the missions. Now they're more interesting. I give a little slack to allow the PC to get the main PA, but they must earn the bonus PA.

**

Playing off your feedback, Rene, what happens when your party breezes through the scenario using diplomacy (which not everyone does) and then the GM sends them on non-written side missions to extend play and a player dies (and let's say can't afford to be rezzed) during a non-written side mission?

Qadira *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Maps, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rene Ayala wrote:

I have positives, negatives and suggestion(s) for thought about this scenario. I'm a fan of constructive criticism as opposed to complaints. Please take these comments as constructive.

** spoiler omitted **...

As a response to the Diplomacy question: I had a group that took approximately normal time through the majority of the PFS until the last two encounters (Not the optional one). In both situations the PCs were able to talk their way out of fighting, however each conversation took upwards of 20-30 minutes all things considered. A DM shouldn't just be accepting one Diplomacy roll as the catch-all of an encounter, the PCs need to interact and talk first (Which might be for several minutes) before the DM should call for the roll.

Also if I remember correctly the last encounter required two successful rolls? Although I just might be remembering the dual 30s that my party rolled for this encounter...

Grand Lodge ****

Joshua J. Frost wrote:
Playing off your feedback, Rene, what happens when your party breezes through the scenario using diplomacy (which not everyone does) and then the GM sends them on non-written side missions to extend play and a player dies (and let's say can't afford to be rezzed) during a non-written side mission?

My previous comments were not proposing a GM send players through non-written encounters. What I meant was the author should have a good idea how their scenario plays. If an author writes a scenario in such a way where Diplomacy may cause players to skip entire Acts I think it's a good idea to include notes for alternatives. Perhaps writing these alternatives as Game Designer notes like those used in Gamemastery modules. The options I wrote in my previous comments were ideas an author could include in Game Designer notes within such a scenario.

Rene

**

I agree with you to a point, but I don't feel it's fair to assume that every author can know every possible way a scenario can be played, especially when once considers the always intangible and varied GM play styles. Even in a game where a full diplomacy group blows through a scenario, I'd ask some of the same questions that were asked above: did the GM do the diplomacy amidst roleplay or were there skill check dice rolls and nothing else? In the case of the archers, did all of the archers just relent or did one relent to diplomacy and the rest wonder what their buddy was doing and attack anyway? There are so many different ways to solve a scenario that I'm not sure the low word-count of a $4 product could cover them.

I appreciate the notion of expecting 4 hours of play and getting 1.5--that sucks. In an OP environment, though, I think you just have to know that sometimes your scenario will be short, sometimes it will run long and unfinished, and sometimes it'll be spot on. There are too many "outside the scenario" metrics to measure here to be sure we'll get it right every time.

Grand Lodge ****

Joshua J. Frost wrote:

I agree with you to a point, but I don't feel it's fair to assume that every author can know every possible way a scenario can be played, especially when once considers the always intangible and varied GM play styles. Even in a game where a full diplomacy group blows through a scenario, I'd ask some of the same questions that were asked above: did the GM do the diplomacy amidst roleplay or were there skill check dice rolls and nothing else? In the case of the archers, did all of the archers just relent or did one relent to diplomacy and the rest wonder what their buddy was doing and attack anyway? There are so many different ways to solve a scenario that I'm not sure the low word-count of a $4 product could cover them.

I appreciate the notion of expecting 4 hours of play and getting 1.5--that sucks. In an OP environment, though, I think you just have to know that sometimes your scenario will be short, sometimes it will run long and unfinished, and sometimes it'll be spot on. There are too many "outside the scenario" metrics to measure here to be sure we'll get it right every time.

Yep, those are fair statements. It's very difficult for an author to include notes to mitigate many situations, and impossible to include them all. This scenario I think is an exception because it includes text that can skip encounters. I would like to stress to you and the author, if he's reading, I'm not complaining in the least. I offered constructive criticism based on my experience playing it.

In our game specifically we roleplayed a little bit. We had a table of six with four of the PCs having zero diplomacy skills, and that's apart from character concepts whose first option wouldn't be to talk it out. One player had a good charisma modifier and the last PC was built for diplomacy. As it turned out he did 99% of the talking. He and the DM roleplayed the archer encounter for a couple minutes. Only one archer spoke, no one attacked. The DM asked for a diplomacy roll. He made the DC and all archers relented. The guard then called main NPC to the gate. He roleplayed that for a couple minutes. Another diplomacy roll was asked, he made it again. We were allowed to enter. Scenario over. The last 15 or so minutes was spent to accomplish missions which I commented on earlier.

Qadira *****

I can support that sort of scenario resolution so long as the rest of the players were supportive of talking their way through it. Many players are chomping on the bit to roll some dice and beat down their opponents. If they don't get this outlet in PFS, they might look somewhere else for it. However, I think Rene is a veteran GM and knows what he's doing. My comments aren't intended for him so much as for other GMs who might take this example and run with it.
"Yeah, you heard me right, I'm gonna diplomacize the hellwasp swarm. I do speak infernal you know..."
Occasionally role-playing out a scenario can be a nice change of pace, but most players are looking for the visceral hack-n-slash experience. I'm inclined to do more role-play with my players when they have a poorly balanced table or characters that are not optimized. But if there’s a single player who’s a Type A personality and needs to be the center of attention at the table, it’s tricky for the GM to satisfy everyone. I GMed a Core Special once where a high diplomacy bard talked his way past nearly every encounter. He was very clever and not just rolling a skill check. But the other players felt bored and useless (but reluctant to ruin what was going to be a bloodless victory).

I guess the other problem with using diplomacy in PFS is the scenarios are written with the expectation that the players kill everything and loot it. Without killing the bandits and taking their stuff, how will the PCs ever get any gold out of the scenario, let alone hit the cap? I’ve run into this same problem in other scenarios, like #24 for instance, where the PCs can actually avoid some fights by being smart. When they realized they were going to come way short on the gold end, suddenly they changed their minds and instigated a fight to get some loot. As a GM I suppose you can decide there was a reward paid by the Thakur for resolving the bandit problem that would replace the amount of loot they came up short on. You might not want to advertise that until Josh has plugged his ears and started his “La-la-la-la-la” litany though :)

Osirion

Our group just finished going thru Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible. Pretty darn good overall.

We did encounter a hiccup on the Osirion Mission.

Spoiler:

The first mission: Recover the Pharoh's Crook of Order

The tag line that seemed to indicate the action required: 'We care only that it is in the hands of those loyal to the Ruby Prince - you may keep it if you like or return it to me for a reward.'

The hiccup occurs when the party finds the Crook in a bunch of pieces that it isn't necessarily intuitive to have the 'imprisioned slaves' rebuild it. To get the prestige point for the 1st mission it has to be reassembled (also to be able to have the flavor of wielding the Pharoh's Crook of Order aka a +1 weapon)

Basically, my character (being Osirion) recovered the pieces and I thought I had accomplished what was required by the mission sheet.

Oops!

So while I thought I had completed both missions successfully, I had only completed one.
The wording in the mission statement did not (in my case) give sufficient direction for the implied result.

Our group did discuss this result briefly (ie to award 1 or 2 prestige points for the Osirion Faction) due to time constraints we didn't come to a conclusion.

Having typed this up though, I think I will chalk this up to a lesson learned and make sure I read the missions for stated and implied tasks in the future. I'll let our GM know so he can process the paperwork.

** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Los Angeles (Venice Beach)

P.17 at the top says that

Spoiler:
PCs get a bonus to their stealth when approaching from the North

But I can't see where it actually says that they do and how much it should be for.

Qadira *****

Preston Poulter wrote:

P.17 at the top says that ** spoiler omitted **

But I can't see where it actually says that they do and how much it should be for.

? Page 17 is the success conditions for Faction missions

Page 9, second column, first paragraph, +10 to stealth check

** Venture-Lieutenant, California—Los Angeles (Venice Beach)

Doug Doug wrote:
Preston Poulter wrote:

P.17 at the top says that ** spoiler omitted **

But I can't see where it actually says that they do and how much it should be for.

? Page 17 is the success conditions for Faction missions

Page 9, second column, first paragraph, +10 to stealth check

Thanks

Andoran ****

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I guess depending on how the group approaches the scenario, it could be called "Negotiations in the Kingdom of the Impossible" but I chose to focus a little on the word "assault", which worked well for the group of blood thirsty Pathfinders that ran through the adventure. Between the twisted gnome sorcerer from Cheliax and the oddly aggresive druid from Andoran, they met every challenge with force. The adventure took almost 3.5 hours and was quite enjoyable.

Cheliax ***** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

What are the odds that any given Taldor PC will have either Knowledge(engineering), Perform (dance) or ranks in Craft to be able to make any of the skill checks needed for this mod? It seems like these missions were specifically Bard-related.

Also, for the Disable Device check for the Osirions, since there isn't any written penalty for failure, could the party Rogues keep trying until they get it? I house-ruled it that the two party rogues could only roll once, since it was supposed to be the difficult faction mission.

Andoran ***

As far as the Taldor Missions are concerned
Perform and Craft can be used untrained, and the mission can be completed by acquiring the services of an expert.

The Taldor PCs in the party I ran completed the statue mission by taking the entire statue. I ran the scenario at tier 1-2 where taking the statue is much more of an option than in tier 4-5.

The Qadiran negotiation ended up being the most entertaining as the PC talked the price down of the item down to 80 gold before realized he did not have 80 gold. After an attempt to barter weapons from earlier in the module increased the cost to 100 gold, the Qadiran agreed to a short-term loan with a Chelaxian PC for a future favor.

Osirion

Okay I completed the adventure for Assault on the Kingdom of Impossible and have come across a problem. I am playing a monk and it would be cool to purchace Mask of the Tiger's Eye.

My problem is...i can't find this item anywheres in the player's handbook, Pathfinder SRD or here and the chronicle lists no reference to the item itself so the GM and I had no clue where to find the item.

I need help cause I really want this item...I think since I can't decide without stats even though the name sounds really cool.

Qadira *****

Rob Rob wrote:

Okay I completed the adventure for Assault on the Kingdom of Impossible and have come across a problem. I am playing a monk and it would be cool to purchace Mask of the Tiger's Eye.

My problem is...i can't find this item anywheres in the player's handbook, Pathfinder SRD or here and the chronicle lists no reference to the item itself so the GM and I had no clue where to find the item.

I need help cause I really want this item...I think since I can't decide without stats even though the name sounds really cool.

The mask is a 'unique item' that will only appear on the Chronicle sheet for PFS#33. Basically it is a masterwork tool for the intimidate skill, out of the PRPG equipment chapter. The cost for a masterwork tool is 50gp and they arbitrarily added 5gp for materials.

You can get a masterwork tool for any skill on your character sheet. It is up to you to decide how it appears or assists you in the use of your skill. My bard uses a masterwork tool for her perform (acting) checks, for example (it won't help for a day job roll however). I decided it was a script from a complex play she is studying. Tools like these can be used in most any situation, but they typically have to be in your hand or on your face (like the mask) in order to be utilized. The Mask of the Tiger's Eye is an imaginative way to represent a masterwork tool, instead of you just saying "I have a masterwork tool that grants me a +2 bonus to intimidate checks".

Osirion *

I ran this for my local group for a change.

It was well enjoyed by all. Only hick up is the obvious link between the ambush point and slave. I read and reread and asked the players to reread... how do you get the ambush point to the players when the slave is suspected as being a spy?

I hope I have not missed something but the logic just seemed out... badly.

I hope to run this module at GenconOz if they have me.

Qadira ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wow

All you folks that negotiated and diplomacy'd your way through this mod are making me laugh. We slaughtered folks left and right. We were having so much difficulty NOT slaughtering the poor hapless bandits in the camp that our rogue ended up shouting "leave us alone or I shall throw this invaluable artifact at you!" and flinging the rod at them. My barbarian ran around screaming and naked pretending to fall down.

As we approached the temple, we had a couple of sneaky guys sneak up to the gate, then try to figure out what to do with the archers on the walls. Our monk snuck around the side and got shot at, then snuck back. Eventually, my barbarian got bored, charged the place, massacred a monk, massacred another monk, ran up the ladder, watched our ranger bull rush an archer off the wall, thought that was a great idea, bull rushed another archer off the wall, then watched the archer fill the final archer full of arrows.

Once inside, we described the actions outside to the mooks, who decided that leaving might be a good idea (WOO intimidate!), then talked Zamir into joining the Society.

It was a lot of fun, mostly because we had a party of awesome RP'ers at the table.

Osirion *

Masika wrote:

It was well enjoyed by all. Only hick up is the obvious link between the ambush point and slave. I read and reread and asked the players to reread... how do you get the ambush point to the players when the slave is suspected as being a spy?

I hope I have not missed something but the logic just seemed out... badly.

I was not clear before slave = Waman

I am surprised no one else found this error. I am hoping that the author or the powers that be can restore the link.

My issues is at the start of the adventure. I will quote what you are to read to players:

Getting Started:

“Waman gave Zamir information that enabled the bandit
fool to steal artifacts from dozens of our caravans and even
from safe houses such as this one. Zamir has a method of
disassembling the artifacts so that he can smuggle them off
the island with ease, bound for ports of call in Cheliax. What
we do not know is where Zamir is, since he never attacks with
his men.”
“I gave Waman the information about your journey, so at
some point along the route, Zamir’s bandits will ambush you.
Previous experience indicates that his bandits will not kill if
The Scepter and the Compass
The Pathfinder Society did not entirely invent the scepter of the
arclords. It is a legendary artifact lost when the Vudrani rajahs
returned to the island in 2822 AR and destroyed the Arclords
of Nex at Padiskar (Knowledge [history] DC 15). The scepter’s
actual powers and location (or even if it survives) are unknown.
The scepter given to the PCs was created by the Society. It has
no actual powers, although a Pathfinder wizard cast magic aura
on it to make it appear magical. The most important feature of
the scepter for the PCs is its unique property that allows it to
be tracked by a fake wayfinder that has been attuned to it.

ACT One:

Three more men
are setting out bedrolls and four mules are picketed beside a
pile of sacks and bundles nearby. They are camped exactly on
the ambush site described in Waman’s itinerary.

Can you see the obvious problem. The Venture Captain says that Waman is a betrayer but dont confront him. The itnerary that the PCs get from Waman does not show the ambush point but the text that you read out to the players does.

Whats the "proper fix" for this? Officially.

Qadira *****

Masika wrote:
Masika wrote:

It was well enjoyed by all. Only hick up is the obvious link between the ambush point and slave. I read and reread and asked the players to reread... how do you get the ambush point to the players when the slave is suspected as being a spy?

I hope I have not missed something but the logic just seemed out... badly.

I was not clear before slave = Waman

I am surprised no one else found this error. I am hoping that the author or the powers that be can restore the link.

My issues is at the start of the adventure. I will quote what you are to read to players:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...

Unofficially you will never get a proper official fix. I paraphrase the description of the ambush point by saying the PCs have arrived at a waypoint as darkness is falling and find some other travelers making a camp there too. A perception check will reveal the travelers to have weapons concealed under their robes. They will claim to be merchants traveling to Padiskar (where the PCs departed from), selling manufactured goods like rugs and cutlery. If the PCs express interest in looking over their wares, two things become apparent. The goods are of low quality and the 'merchants' know little about commerce. This doesn't give anything away, but definitely will put the PCs on their guard. Bold players might confront the 'merchants' and the truth could come out, but most will play along and anticipate an ambush from that direction.

Osirion *

Thanks Doug Doug.

Why no offical change? It is an obvious fault with the product. One would think that Paizo would address this issue.

Qadira *****

Masika wrote:

Thanks Doug Doug.

Why no offical change? It is an obvious fault with the product. One would think that Paizo would address this issue.

This is not the first time this issue has been brought up. It's not like it affects the outcome though, so GMs have just learned to work around it. To correct it involves more than just editing the act and re-issuing the pdf. I'd rather have Josh working on the next scenarios then polishing up the old ones. That's why I think you'll never see an official change.

Spoiler:
(Sometimes reverse psychology works where complaining doesn't :)

****

Masika wrote:

Thanks Doug Doug.

Why no offical change? It is an obvious fault with the product. One would think that Paizo would address this issue.

One would think.

They don't fix their stuff. This mod is not the worst offender.

Den

Osirion *

Considering we pay for the product. :)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

We generally don't have time to go back and fix errors, but when we have the chance and time, we do.

For the Pathfinder Society Scenarios, we pretty much have only one person devoted to handling the products—that's Josh. He happens to be in the middle of a vacation right now and isn't available to answer concerns or problems, and when he DOES get back, he generally has to prioritize what he addresses because there's just no time to fix every problem AND continue forging ahead with the schedule. I will send him a link to this thread, though, so that when he gets back he'll check the issue out with the scenario.

I do appreciate the concern folks have for errors and the time it sometimes takes to get them addressed. I'm also aware of the perception that we're not providing the amount of help with errata and FAQs and the like that we could be providing; it's something I've been trying to get addressed, but until the middle of May, which is the deadline for shipping files to the printer if we're going to have those books printed in time for Gen Con, fixing errors and building FAQs and addressing errors is, unfortunately, a VERY low priority for us.

And in the end, as Masika implies... you DO pay for the product. And not buying products or posting negative reviews is a VERY effective way to get the message across to us that we need to stay on our toes.

So... sorry that the error is causing concerns... this post is mostly just to let folks know that we ARE listening, even if the fact that we're slammed with other issues and problems right now is preventing us from fixing everything makes it look like we're ignoring you. We're not ignoring anyone.

****

James Jacobs wrote:

We generally don't have time to go back and fix errors, but when we have the chance and time, we do.

For the Pathfinder Society Scenarios, we pretty much have only one person devoted to handling the products—that's Josh. He happens to be in the middle of a vacation right now and isn't available to answer concerns or problems, and when he DOES get back, he generally has to prioritize what he addresses because there's just no time to fix every problem AND continue forging ahead with the schedule. I will send him a link to this thread, though, so that when he gets back he'll check the issue out with the scenario.

I do appreciate the concern folks have for errors and the time it sometimes takes to get them addressed. I'm also aware of the perception that we're not providing the amount of help with errata and FAQs and the like that we could be providing; it's something I've been trying to get addressed, but until the middle of May, which is the deadline for shipping files to the printer if we're going to have those books printed in time for Gen Con, fixing errors and building FAQs and addressing errors is, unfortunately, a VERY low priority for us.

And in the end, as Masika implies... you DO pay for the product. And not buying products or posting negative reviews is a VERY effective way to get the message across to us that we need to stay on our toes.

So... sorry that the error is causing concerns... this post is mostly just to let folks know that we ARE listening, even if the fact that we're slammed with other issues and problems right now is preventing us from fixing everything makes it look like we're ignoring you. We're not ignoring anyone.

James,

Can you name 1 pathfinder society mod that has been updated to fix an error. I can't. For certain posting a harsh review doesn't seem to do it.
Pathfinder Society Scenario #41: The Devil We Know—Part III: Crypt of Fools has a glaring omission in maps that renders a puzzle unsolvable as written. A fix that should take less time than the time spent to implement than the time that is being spent trying to telling people repeatedly that you are listening and then not actually fixing them.

I can understand not fixing stuff that has been out for a year already. But when you find out about a problem with a mod within a month of it coming out and sit on your hands and do not fix it. Unacceptable.

Den

Lantern Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Australia—Melbourne aka DarkWhite

uncleden wrote:

James,

Can you name 1 pathfinder society mod that has been updated to fix an error. I can't.

There have been a few. I have received several emails from Paizo advising that a scenario has been updated and to re-personalise your link and download again if you want the updated version. I can't look back through my emails to cite specific examples, because I'm replying from work not home, but it has happened. It is possible if you haven't noticed these, that you've purchased these scenarios after they've already been updated. IIRC, the updates in question were rebalancing encounter CRs where they were too deadly, or issues of that nature.

I realise there are many other scenarios that could benefit from updates, but feedback of this nature between GMs, and replies from Paizo staff, are what these messageboards are good for, and you quite often pick up different perspectives on particular scenarios based on other groups experiences.

FWIW, Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible remains one of my favourite scenarios to date. It's a lot of fun, as different groups handle it different ways, which gives good re-play value for GMs.

Osirion *

Thanks Jacob.

I appreciate the update. I have thought about it and will modify it myself. It is a minor thing I can fix.

I enjoy, as well as my friends, all if the PFS I have played/GMes to date. I realise Joshua is away atm and me raising the issues is related to the fact I played it this scenario last week with NIL prep other than printing the pages out. (we needed a break from RotRL and it was a long weekend - I had a late night out pass from the wife as well!)

I agree with Darkwhite about this scenario being very cool. It plays well once you get over the ambush point. Feed back from other GMs/Paizo staff is cool but uncleden raise a point for consideration.

**

I have fixed errors in scenarios and uploaded the fixes in the past and shall continue to do so when I have time (and am a little mystified to hear folks so adamantly saying that we don't fix errors when I clearly have in the past). I now know there's an error in this and I'll add it to my list of things I need to fix. I wish I could get to them every single time someone brings them up, but beyond quickly posting a fix, I can't generally get to them right away.

Doug Doug has posted a fix above with regard to paraphrasing the read-aloud text in a way that avoids the confusion between "you will be ambushed" and "here's the site where they are going to ambush you." I would stick with that for now.

Andoran Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau aka Arnim Thayer

uncleden wrote:
Can you name 1 pathfinder society mod that has been updated to fix an error. I can't.

I can. In fact, after pointing out that one of the Map packs was mislabeled in Delirium's Tangle, it was fixed WITHIN DAYS and an e-mail sent to me notifying me of the update.

Thanks for the many times you have given me a speedy response to a question or a scenario issue, Josh. I, for one, appreciate you hard work!

1 to 50 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / Pathfinder Society GM Discussion / Pathfinder Society Scenario #33: Assault on the Kingdom of the Impossible SPOILER All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©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.