We probably should have been more clear about the XP thing, I suppose. Our standing is that whenever XP gets handed out for ANY reason, it's split up among the party. If it's intended to not be split up, we specifically say so in the text—and we almost never do this. We DID experiment a bit with this in the start of Skull & Shackles, but beyond that, when you see XP, it's split evenly among the party.
In any event, yes, if multiple PCs manage to get multiple friendships/romances/rivalries, the rewards are multiple as well. Whether or not any one single NPC is available for multiple romances is up to the GM.
This can end up with players having one person doing everything while they watch the scenery.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This can end up with players having one person doing everything while they watch the scenery.We probably should have been more clear about the XP thing, I suppose. Our standing is that whenever XP gets handed out for ANY reason, it's split up among the party. If it's intended to not be split up, we specifically say so in the text—and we almost never do this. We DID experiment a bit with this in the start of Skull & Shackles, but beyond that, when you see XP, it's split evenly among the party.
In any event, yes, if multiple PCs manage to get multiple friendships/romances/rivalries, the rewards are multiple as well. Whether or not any one single NPC is available for multiple romances is up to the GM.
I don't see a difference there between the rogue disarming a trap while the rest of the PCs watch.
This can end up with players having one person doing everything while they watch the scenery.We probably should have been more clear about the XP thing, I suppose. Our standing is that whenever XP gets handed out for ANY reason, it's split up among the party. If it's intended to not be split up, we specifically say so in the text—and we almost never do this. We DID experiment a bit with this in the start of Skull & Shackles, but beyond that, when you see XP, it's split evenly among the party.
In any event, yes, if multiple PCs manage to get multiple friendships/romances/rivalries, the rewards are multiple as well. Whether or not any one single NPC is available for multiple romances is up to the GM.
I don't see a difference there between the rogue disarming a trap while the rest of the PCs watch.
The fighter being the only one doing anything in battle (unless s/he is uncouncious), The Wizard outshining everyone.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This can end up with players having one person doing everything while they watch the scenery.
IMG, while the exp rewards would be shared, the boons would not. The relationship-monkey might help the party get exp, but those high-level benefits would be reserved for people who invested in the relationships.
Those CHA-dumpers have another way to succeed, though, in that high rolls early on will net bigger increases in scores, which will negate the CHA advantage pretty quickly.
|
Creative Director
|
The fighter being the only one doing anything in battle (unless s/he is uncouncious), The Wizard outshining everyone.This can end up with players having one person doing everything while they watch the scenery.We probably should have been more clear about the XP thing, I suppose. Our standing is that whenever XP gets handed out for ANY reason, it's split up among the party. If it's intended to not be split up, we specifically say so in the text—and we almost never do this. We DID experiment a bit with this in the start of Skull & Shackles, but beyond that, when you see XP, it's split evenly among the party.
In any event, yes, if multiple PCs manage to get multiple friendships/romances/rivalries, the rewards are multiple as well. Whether or not any one single NPC is available for multiple romances is up to the GM.
I don't see a difference there between the rogue disarming a trap while the rest of the PCs watch.
And now you've taken the conversation out of the original topic and up onto a "caster edition soapbox." Which isn't the point of or appropriate for this thread.
And now you've taken the conversation out of the original topic and up onto a "caster edition soapbox." Which isn't the point of or appropriate for this thread.The fighter being the only one doing anything in battle (unless s/he is uncouncious), The Wizard outshining everyone.This can end up with players having one person doing everything while they watch the scenery.We probably should have been more clear about the XP thing, I suppose. Our standing is that whenever XP gets handed out for ANY reason, it's split up among the party. If it's intended to not be split up, we specifically say so in the text—and we almost never do this. We DID experiment a bit with this in the start of Skull & Shackles, but beyond that, when you see XP, it's split evenly among the party.
In any event, yes, if multiple PCs manage to get multiple friendships/romances/rivalries, the rewards are multiple as well. Whether or not any one single NPC is available for multiple romances is up to the GM.
I don't see a difference there between the rogue disarming a trap while the rest of the PCs watch.
Sorry, well as long as those other PCs watch for enemies (and other troubles) while the rogue disarm a trap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will always be situations where one character outshines the others, that's life.
As was already said, if all characters ignore the relationship stuff, they may get the XP (which keeps things easier for the GM too as there really is only one XP score to keep track of), but they do not gain the boons of the relationship.
Also, really, how likely is it that all the players but one ignore it?
In the PbP game I'm running, 3 characters (that had left the game) were killed by the Soggy River Monster while they were exploring the swamp. Bit more complicated than that, i'll put it in a spoiler at the end. The rest of the group later arrived and killed the monster, but was too late to save them, except one, but three dead.
Now I'm wondering though, how would the NPCs, mainly the 4 story NPCs react to this news? And the sheriff too, and maybe some of the other town officials.
They had relationship scores between 0 and 4 with most NPCs, just two of the dead ones had 7 and 8 with Shalelu.
Would they basicly say "Ok, that's sad, but life of an adventurer is dangerous. Death happens" and go on with their lifes?
Especially Ameiko once she gets confronted with the letter from her grandfather as well.
One of the groups (with the 2 players) was ambushed by the Soggy River Monster, and defeated. When the 2 players came about again, the other 4 of their group (yes the old GM ran 6 people per game) had vanished, being dragged of.
So they set out to find the second group who they knew were exploring a cave in the south of the swamp, and actually managed to find them. They'd just defeated the skeletons and found the treasure and everything.
So the combined group set out to save the dragged of people, but were to late. When they arrived at the lair and slew the SRM (actually I turned it into a family of 2 adults and 1 baby wrathspawn to make it a bit harder for a larger group of level 2 people - still defeated them easily), they found 3 of the 4 dead and the last just being unconcious, deep in negative HPs. I had actually rolled how many of them were dead, there was a 1:9 chance that all survived *shrug*
They healed the survivor and took the corpses back to the town.
It certainly impressed on the characters that adventuring is not just sunshine and roses, even if no "real" PC was killed (by this time I don't consider people that have been missing for a month to be "real PCs" anymore). But as I said, not quite sure how the people of Sandpoint react to the news.
While I understand the whole ...wanting all PC's at the same level...to that just seems to reward the player that sits back and lets everyone else do all the heavy lifting.
Example 1: Legacy of Fire AP: book 3, the fight against Father Jackal
while the rest of the party was engaged in the fight with Father Jackal,the rogue of the group used a potion of invisibility to sneak across the room and begin looting the room the fight was in. when the fight was done 3 of the 5 PC's that actually fought where near death & the rogue and pulled the 12 2inch diameter pearl eyes out of the statue that was in the room. Now RAW say i give that rogue XP like he was involved in the fight. If you where a player would you have wanted to give him full XP?
Example 2: Jade Regent AP: book 1
I have one player that is actually doing stuff to build the relation ship with the NPC linked to the trait she picked. the others seemed to just not care and are happy with the skill bump the trait gave them. Why give the other player the 400 XP as well when they did nothing to get it.
@ James Jacobs: While I see your point with the rogue disarming a trap statement, how would the player of that rogue feel if he was sent into a mayors house alone and had to break into the mayors office the his safe, and that he had to share all the XP from that with the rest of his party that stayed back at the inn?
IMO the shared XP thing leads to people "ROLL" playing ....and not "ROLE" playing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@ James Jacobs: While I see your point with the rogue disarming a trap statement, how would the player of that rogue feel if he was sent into a mayors house alone and had to break into the mayors office the his safe, and that he had to share all the XP from that with the rest of his party that stayed back at the inn?
IMO the shared XP thing leads to people "ROLL" playing ....and not "ROLE" playing.
I think with this type of situational element, you'll find that different groups prefer to handle it in different ways. Therefore, the adventure needs to make an assumption one way or another. I think doing it the way they are, which eres on the side of consistency, is the best policy. GMs can then freely alter that assumption as they see fit, much in the same way that a GM needs to alter assumptions when they have 6 instead of 4 PCs, for instance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ James Jacobs: While I see your point with the rogue disarming a trap statement, how would the player of that rogue feel if he was sent into a mayors house alone and had to break into the mayors office the his safe, and that he had to share all the XP from that with the rest of his party that stayed back at the inn?
IMO the shared XP thing leads to people "ROLL" playing ....and not "ROLE" playing.
There are always exceptions, and I don't see a problem awarding xp for relationship seperately. In the end it balances out I guess.
I'm not sure however about your conclusion that it leads to roll instead of roleplaying.
If in your example the rogue gets the full xp for that, would the party really send the rogue in there alone, even if it's the reasonable, role-play approach? Or would they say "screw this, we make a frontal assault so we all get xp"? In which case the seperate XP actually lead to roll over role-playing.
It depends on the group I guess.
I guess my point is, if everyone is doing something "special" once in a while, like the rogue looting that safe, the wizard deciphering a critical inscription, etc, then their "seperate xp boni" will balance out or at least close enough. I mean if one has 100 xp more than the other really doesn't matter at level 10 anymore. And you can just go and spread them out right away and save yourself the headache of keeping seperate score.
If however one of the players keeps doing alot while the others don't, you might just give that one something to make up. Magic items, or anything. Doesn't have to be extra xp.
Sense everyone chose my statement to James to comment on, let me clarify.
the statement reflected what I have seen while playing using the Pathfinder Core Rule sense 2009 with the groups of people that I have played with. The rogue in that statement was a character I played...the party need to prove to the king that the mayor of a town had been skimming off of the town taxes. The breaking into the mayors villa was left to me, and while I had no problem as I was playing the rogue...what happened around the table shocked me. The whole encounter took 15 min tops, while the GM ran me through that, two players (a married couple) went upstairs for some private time, one player went and played Mario Cart, and the last player ran to 7-11 for Slurpee's. When all was said and done the 200 XP that the GM had decided on for the encounter was shared with the whole party.
Now I don't mind sharing the XP if the trap is part of a larger whole encounter that the entire party is taking part in. I just think that if one person is doing most of the heavy lifting with on help from the rest of the party then they should get the bigger paycheck.
If I insulted James or anyone else I am sorry
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^In that situation I can understand why you might advocate individual XP. Sure the other players might not be in the scene, but to outright get up and leave for its duration seems a bit tasteless.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^In that situation I can understand why you might advocate individual XP. Sure the other players might not be in the scene, but to outright get up and leave for its duration seems a bit tasteless.
Absolutely agreed. However, that scenario just reinforces my assertion that such an instance is very much a GM/group problem as opposed to an issue with the module's experience.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I would agree that's more a problem with respect among players in your particular group and not a problem with roll- vs role-playing or the way xp is given out.
|
You can read the developer's response to the XP question on the first page of this very thread. Or by clicking right here. Or I can just tell you that "serious attempt to explore Brinewall" is defined as getting to the second level after clearing out the main level. Rewards from use of the Relationship system can also give them a bit more XP to reach the goals.
Before I started running the game, I went and added up the XP available...I knew I was going to be running a 6 person party, and so the encounters would need to be buffed up. I added more monsters, and advanced others. XP story rewards got increased by 50%, and I also add a small amount of XP every session for good roleplaying.
I added a few encounters for the journey between sandpoint and brinewall. Some of these were from the random encounters, some were ones I made on my own. My biggest gripe is the 4 NPCs...scaling encounters for the party plus them (and other NPCs) is really difficult.
My group is about halfway through book 2 now, and with a little leg work and planning up front, the players are about where they should be in terms of XP.
This is a three-part question really:
1) Can Whispering Shrike been repaired by a Mending spell, assuming that the CL of the caster is at least 5?
2) Maybe spoiler for RotRL? I put it in spoilers anyway (just asking if someone from RotRL is still around in sandpoint when JR happens)
3) Altenatively, what would you think are the chances to find a Scroll of Mending at CL 5 at the local magic shop? :)
^ The answer to the spoiler depends largely on what happened for the group that played RotRL. If nobody in your group did so then you're generally free to assume whatever you wish.
This is a three-part question really:
1) Can Whispering Shrike been repaired by a Mending spell, assuming that the CL of the caster is at least 5?
2) Maybe spoiler for RotRL? I put it in spoilers anyway (just asking if someone from RotRL is still around in sandpoint when JR happens)
** spoiler omitted **3) Altenatively, what would you think are the chances to find a Scroll of Mending at CL 5 at the local magic shop? :)
Quatar, you are confused about the Whispering Shrike. The sword is not broken. A broken item is listed as "broken", such as Tsutamu's "broken masterwork chainmail". The wakizashi just has a message hidden in a secret compartment in the hilt.
Also, take a look at the definition of broken in the glossary. If it was broken, the sword would not have a critical range of 18-20, as listed in page 21.
"If the item is a weapon, any attacks made with the item suffer a –2 penalty on attack and damage rolls. Such weapons only score a critical hit on a natural 20 and only deal ×2 damage on a confirmed critical hit"
^ It's still effectively broken from the broken hilt.
^ It's still effectively broken from the broken hilt.
Oops! Missed the description. Then, then answers to questions 1 and 3 are clearly: yes and lower than low. And the answer to question 2 is, well, what Gluttony said.
My players are approaching Old Megus's shack in the swamp soon, and there's the possibility that they'll get to talk to Skitterfoot instead of outright killing him.
Now I remember reading somewhere some time ago, that Megus tried to transform herself into a dragon, and that it was the ratling that sabotaged the attempt and killed her.
I like that idea and might go with it, but if there's some info about it somewhere I'd like to read up on it.
I've no idea where I read this, maybe it was just something another GM had made up to flesh out the situation, because I can't find it anymore.
So either I'm reading over some obvious hints in the AP, or there's really not much background given on what really happened.
Hi everyone, I am running 5 players through this part of the adventure currently (more specifically they are about to enter Brinewall Castle). At the current moment they all have 1969 XP and after tracking the total amount of XP they will gain from every encounter in the castle, they will all gain 5600 XP so they will have 7769 XP. The book does say that the characters should be level 4 by the end of the adventure, but I'm not sure if that seems a bit too close to level 5 before they start the next part of the adventure.
Thoughts?
There's some discussion about XP in the first two pages of this thread.
1969 actually seems rather low for entering the castle, that's just short of level 2.
And 7769 is halfway through level 3, not almost 5, so you're actually behind.
Are you using fast xp track maybe? The XP rewards assume you use medium.
Did you give out the story rewards too, or have your party skipped stuff?
However alot of GMs (me included) pretty much ignore XP completely and just tell the players to level up when appropriate (theres a guideline at the beginning of the book what level the party should be at what point).
I wasn't aware that adventure paths assumed medium progression, that would make sense. Got it now, thanks Quatar.
On page 6:
“The Brinewall Legacy” uses the medium XP track.
:)
To make interesting reading for a GM, like me. Who is interested in that? So I can have inspiration on how to run NPCs besides "RRRRRAAARRGGGHH! Smash!"
Exactly. Slugwort became a huge part of our game. In fact, he is now the "ruler" of Brinewall Castle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^ As a note, the second half of the page consists of Slugwort's treasure, and how to run Kelda, not the room in general. Slugwort's backstory is for those groups that don't immediately react by killing the ogre.
Your group did react that way, and that's fine, it's one way of playing after all. The info you didn't care for needs to be included for the sake of those who play differently, such as what happened with Joseph Wilson's group.
Maybe stupid question:
It says Detect Law detects the Kami possessing Ameiko. What about Detect Magic, does that pick up anything?
It's a "magically induced coma" after all, it feel weird if Detect Magic wouldn't pick up that at least (making the heal check easier or obsolete to diagnose that), but would it actually pick up that she's possessed?
Considering that the word magic is literally a part of "magically induced coma" I'd have detect magic work as well. Though at best it would be able to identify that Ameiko was under the effects of a possession without identifying what was possessing her.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd probably do something similar to Gluttony's suggestion, though I'd be extremely vague. Something along the lines of, "You do detect a magical aura, but it's strange. There's a slight rhythmic pulse to it and it's of no definable school of magic." (I wouldn't say "possession"; I'd use the description to suggest something with "life"-like qualities, such as a heartbeat, but that's it. I'd let it be a mystery or let the players deduce it on their own.)
Actually just noticed one of my players is a Menhir Savant druid, they can "detect the presence of undead; fey; outsiders; and astral, ethereal, or incorporeal creatures"
Now I figure normally Kami would detect on at least the outsider radar, and probably one of the last three...
But do you think it would when inside someone?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
About Slugwort:
Somehow, my group managed to convince the dull witted ogre to join them.
He is now part of the caravan, with a curse put on him by the party witch to follow the Ulfen barbarians directions or face consequences.
I was not thrilled at first but I realized this could be interesting. Imagine inviting the Hulk to join your Caravan. I don't think he will be around long.. but any thoughts on what I should do to make him memorable?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have Slugwort eat all the food on the caravan. He offers to go hunting with you, maybe provokes a herd of woolly rhinos into a stampede?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK...that helps ....I just didn't need one of my players pointing out that I had missed something. I have been know to over look details from time to time. My super enthusiastic nature with this AP has shown through to the players....and they all laugh at me as I finally get to put that history of the Far East class to use.
I know this response is late to your post, but do a Google search for 'kamon'. You will find many wonderful images to choose from.
I have selected a crest with two cranes for Ameiko's legacy...
Will there be a miniatures set for Jade Regent?
First, you should understand that I'm running caravan combat differently than as provided in the rules. For any caravan combat, I take the PCs out of the caravan (and the caravan loses the bonus from having the heroes in it). The caravan fights an abstract enemy, per the normal rules, while the PCs fight one or two "bosses". The sooner the PCs finish their own fight, the quicker they get back to the caravan and get the hero bonus back to its stats. So far, the players are really enjoying this. We talked about it at the end of the game and they agreed running the whole combat on the map, with all the PCs, would be tedious but just doing the caravan mini-game would be boring (to them; YMMV).
I've been considering the same thing. We'll be starting Jade Regent in a couple weeks and I'll keep these things in mind. Sounds like a great encounter, very well handled.
We probably should have been more clear about the XP thing, I suppose. Our standing is that whenever XP gets handed out for ANY reason, it's split up among the party. If it's intended to not be split up, we specifically say so in the text—and we almost never do this. We DID experiment a bit with this in the start of Skull & Shackles, but beyond that, when you see XP, it's split evenly among the party.
"The first time you reach this Relationsihp Level with an NPC, you gain 400xp." There are a lot of "you"s in that sentence and, personally, I love that.
I want to encourage players to develop friendships and rivalries with the NPCs and am lucky to have a group of roleplayers already excited about the idea. Once a player gains an XP bonus, the others will be even more encouraged to participate, whether by building a friendship, a maternal or sibling dynamic, or a rivalry. One of my players is a vivisectionist alchemist and the younger sister of Amieko. If that doesn't develop into a sibling rivalry, I'm not sure what would.
In short, I don't see a few hundred xp making more of a difference than I can compensate for.
A couple of things to watch out for in the relationship system:
The adventure itself doesn't give the players much in the way of reasons to interact with the NPCs. Most of the game time is the PCs off exploring something while the NPCs do their own thing. If you want to develop relationship storylines, you'll have to do that yourself.
If you follow strict relationship mechanics, then players may start trying to mechanically pursue the relationship system.
"Right, in order to gain another relationship point with each of the NPCs I'll have to leave the dungeon and give each of them a presents from my bag of pre-bought gifts until I pass the diplomacy check. No, it can't wait - if we keep going I'll level up and miss the opportunity."
A couple of things to watch out for in the relationship system:
The adventure itself doesn't give the players much in the way of reasons to interact with the NPCs. Most of the game time is the PCs off exploring something while the NPCs do their own thing. If you want to develop relationship storylines, you'll have to do that yourself.
If you follow strict relationship mechanics, then players may start trying to mechanically pursue the relationship system.
"Right, in order to gain another relationship point with each of the NPCs I'll have to leave the dungeon and give each of them a presents from my bag of pre-bought gifts until I pass the diplomacy check. No, it can't wait - if we keep going I'll level up and miss the opportunity."
Good advice. My players are already deep into the backgrounds of the NPCs, some investing two or even three traits, with the NPCs woven solidly into their origins. I suspect I won't have an issue adlibing interactions and keeping the players interested.
With only 4 players, I'm anticipating at least one of the NPCs accompanying the PCs on their missions, particularly the early ones. The rules anticipate the NPCs being in danger, giving each player a +1 to attack foes when they're threatened. I'll be setting the scenarios up so at least one of them is involved significantly.
One of my PCs want to destroy the Pazuzu Statuette but I dont have any stats on it, could someone help?
Well, it should not be that difficult, just avoid touching it. ^^
Well, it should not be that difficult, just avoid touching it. ^^
Yeah, intent to want to destroy it should be enough, I don't think any magic/curses in it makes it inherently more resilient. Both of my groups chopped it up.