3-16 Midnight Mauler mechanics question


GM Discussion

Scarab Sages 5/5

Specifically I'm looking for how the chase mechanics could/should work. I'm fairly sure I'm running these right or close to right, but talking to other GMs/players it's clear that people are doing whatever they want for the big chase. When I played in this last year as a special event the GM wasn't familiar with the Gamemastery rules for a chase. I'm hoping to clarify everything just a bit since I'll probably run this scenario again.

The basic mechanics -- I prepped my players that the chase used special mechanics and things wouldn't necessarily make sense compared to a normal encounter. Players move through "cards", then perform a skill check (may also be a saving throw or BAB check) to exit the card. All distance is hand-waved at around 30' per card with slower players getting a -2 penalty for every 10' below 30' and +2 for every 10' over 30' speed they possess.

Spells like fly don't automatically "win" a chase, the player still needs to make a climb DC, but would get a +10 bonus. So with a DC15 climb they're generally going to make it, but you sorta rationalize this that it's a chase and they're bobbing and weaving. In a non-Society game I'd probably have them roll a Fly skill instead. Spells like teleport would let them bypass the skill check altogether, but being a chase it's not like they could just teleport to the end unless that was a known location. Also presumably if a challenge is CMB 12 'Force a Door' each player has to force the door. Rationalize as need..maybe the door shuts or just represents that they're not all running the same route and are dealing with different doors.

Where the rules get a little more clunky is the full-round action option. The players are generally already making a move and an action to leave a square so this should probably be called 'tossing the dice' or 'getting the lead out'. This lets the players move ahead "3 cards" by completing both skill checks on the card they're leaving.

(For completion's sake I should mention that failing one roll be <5 results in only moving one card. By failing by more they don't move. By failing both rolls the player loses their next turn.)

So this can be interpreted a ton of ways and basically I did a trial run before running the scenario and we tried a couple variations until it seemed right to us. As written I'd take it to mean you do the 2 challenges in your current card, do the 2 challenges in the next card then you'd land in the 3rd card. The interpretation we went to was you pass the 2 of the initial card you're leaving and land 2 cards later. I had a player afterwards insist you'd land 3 cards later, but that doesn't sound correct.

So here's an example from Midnight Mauler:

Merisiel and Valeros start on the Collapsed Structure with 'Force the Door (CMB DC 12) and Clamber Over (Climb DC 15). Merisiel decided to climb since she's not super strong. Valeros on the other hand is fairly strong and fairly agile so he goes for both. Let's say they both make it.

Merisiel is in the next card 'Overgrown Greenbelt'. By my interpretation Valeros is at the 'Crumbling Bridge' or basically in the same square as the Mauler starts out. There's also some ambiguity if he's just entering the card or if he's at the far end of it.

The next question would be let's say that Valeros manages to pull ahead of the Mauler after a couple rounds. Could he ready an action to tackle the guy as he moves through the card? That'd make sense if the Mauler only moved one card, but if he moved multiple cards he seems to leap ahead. This is also where the abstraction of the card mechanic clashes with the normal rules.

The Exchange 5/5

As soon as a PC reaches a card occupied by the Mauler, you should pull out the flipmat and go to the next encounter (keep the chase cards active though). The PC may end up one-on-one with the Mauler until the other PCs arrive. In your example, I am wondering why Valeros skipped the Overgrown Greenbelt. He needs to succeed on all the challenges on each card to move ahead three. As soon as he fails one he's dead in the water. Each PC has two move actions a round, unless they declare they are attempting the triple move.

I start the Mauler out atop the crumbling bridge and put him in the initiative order. It's completely possible that a PC catches him before he can go. If that happens, the other PCs still have to complete the first two challenges to reach the combat. I've had the Mauler drop PCs piecemeal as they catch up with him ahead of the clunky party tanks.

I think for this scenario to be enjoyable you shouldn't get too entrenched with the way the chase rules are literally written. The most complaints I have heard regarding this scenario are from arguments/misunderstandings over the chase rules. If a PC is stuck and can't make either challenge, be creative and allow them to try something different after spinning their wheels for a turn. The game is pointless if the players walk away from the table frustrated and feeling cheated. On the other hand, not everyone always wins. But give them a fighting chance.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Doug Miles wrote:
If a PC is stuck and can't make either challenge, be creative and allow them to try something different after spinning their wheels for a turn. The game is pointless if the players walk away from the table frustrated and feeling cheated.

What Doug said is very important. When I played Midnight Mauler (GM'd by Doug, BTW), I was rather fustrated by the lack of progress my Dwarven Cleric could make. -2 for being slow, plus armor check penalty, plus cleric skills don't make for good chase numbers. I know that the PFS requires rather rigid rules following (and justifyably so), but having just 2 possible checks per card is too limiting for many characters. It requires a GM willing to try and make it fun for all.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Doug Miles wrote:

The PC may end up one-on-one with the Mauler until the other PCs arrive. In your example, I am wondering why Valeros skipped the Overgrown Greenbelt. He needs to succeed on all the challenges on each card to move ahead three. As soon as he fails one he's dead in the water. Each PC has two move actions a round, unless they declare they are attempting the triple move.

That was one of 2 interpretations I mentioned. The rules say he must overcome both obstacles of the card he is leaving and not of each card he is leaving (or moving through). However, the whole thing is poorly worded since the rules say moving through a card is a move action and the obstacle is a standard action. So apparently on a full round action the character can apparently make multiple move actions and double that many standard actions. I wish they'd just abandoned any reference to combat type terminology.

Doug Miles wrote:
I start the Mauler out atop the crumbling bridge and put him in the initiative order. It's completely possible that a PC catches him before he can go. If that happens, the other PCs still have to complete the first two challenges to reach the combat. I've had the Mauler drop PCs piecemeal as they catch up with him ahead of the clunky party tanks.

Despite his CR he's fairly wimpy. His bite is weak and his overall strength is low. However, his buddy wolf helped out with flanks and he almost dropped pre-gen lvl 4 Merisiel in the test game we played Saturday. She had help from Reiko though and they kept him busy until Valeros showed up to finish things.

Doug Miles wrote:
I think for this scenario to be enjoyable you shouldn't get too entrenched with the way the chase rules are literally written.

I agree, but it's pretty common for a scenario to feature an often ignored mechanic like haunts, high altitude, or whatever and make it the focal challenge. So I try to incorporate "today's lesson" effectively.

Doug Miles wrote:

The most complaints I have heard regarding this scenario are from arguments/misunderstandings over the chase rules.

If a PC is stuck and can't make either challenge, be creative and allow them to try something different after spinning their wheels for a turn. The game is pointless if the players walk away from the table frustrated and feeling cheated. On the other hand, not everyone always wins. But give them a fighting chance.

As a player my party failed miserably during this sequence a year ago so it kind of became my focus to:

1. make sure I'm not penalizing my players through my misinterpretation of the mechanic (if only our party's monk could go back in time and use full round actions)

2. explore a unique mechanic that's part of, but distinct from the core pathfinder rules

Of course I also posted this in the PFS section because obviously in a home game I would've just kept this whole sequence loose and not had as many of the abstractions the normal chase mechanic adapts.

**edit**
Oh hey and thanks! I was doing a quick readthrough and my response was super-dry. My apologies for the walls of text. I'm also coming off an attempt of making a synthesist so I'm getting a tired of interpreting rules that are a little less defined.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Bill Faulkner wrote:
What Doug said is very important. When I played Midnight Mauler (GM'd by Doug, BTW), I was rather fustrated by the lack of progress my Dwarven Cleric could make. -2 for being slow, plus armor check penalty, plus cleric skills don't make for good chase numbers. I know that the PFS requires rather rigid rules following (and justifyably so), but having just 2 possible checks per card is too limiting for many characters. It requires a GM willing to try and make it fun for all.

Though I can see your point here, it was a lot more dramatic in our game when everyone had problems in the chase scene when one player finally made it at the last second. If I started allowing "creativeness" that did not follow the rules, the drama of the scene would have been drastically reduced.

1/5

I just ran it, and allowed creativeness. It let them attempt to use the skills they had, or come up with something else.

The stuck door, the dex fighter, chopped it down with an adamantine pick ax. He had it on his sheet so why not? It did not matter in the end though. They had perhaps the worst skill rolls I have ever seen and the mauler got to the end of the chase about 5 squares ahead. This was even with the Mauler being stuck for 2 rounds in one place.

As to the Mauler doing damage, if was vicious while he had flank. He dropped the fighter twice, and killed Kyra before the flanking wolf was taken out.

lots of fun

The Exchange 5/5

One-on-one the Mauler is a threat. Take out his flanker and he's living on borrowed time. I love the times when the players forgot to take him alive.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Doug Miles wrote:
One-on-one the Mauler is a threat. Take out his flanker and he's living on borrowed time. I love the times when the players forgot to take him alive.

I have no Clue what you are talking about!

When there was a 1-2 version of him I took him out during the chase with a Max damage Crit with my Musket and silver bullets *44 dmg*. Of course there isn't a 1-2 version of him anymore and the 3-4 version that would still leave him with 1 hp.

Sovereign Court 2/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage

I am having a problem with The chase rules, that and the description of what the mauler does.

So a character can take a Move action leave their square and a Standard to over come the obstacle. I understand this, easy.

Or a character can use a Full round to move 3 squares but must overcome both of the obstacles they are leaving.

This is somewhat confusing.

When starting out a PC can try a full round action to overcome a DC 12 CMB and a DC 15 climb and leave the Collapse Structure (the starting card) and can reach 3 squares away, the Crumbling Bridge (the card with the Mauler), correct?

In the description of the Mauler it states "He attempts a double move every round, never attempting to move three squares unless the PCs are immediate behind him". ???

By from what I am understanding the Mauler can't make a "double move" correct? Either a Move to exist and a Standard to over come obstacle or a full to try to move 3 squares? if i am missing something please help me out.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / 3-16 Midnight Mauler mechanics question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in GM Discussion