|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so I just played "Among the Gods." A group of Pathfinders, in my case all level 7s are sent to the Mt. Everest equivalent of PFS to dig up a treasure in a tomb up the mountain. The usual grind.
My issue: The Pathfinders all lvl. 7 are unprepared by their VC. They are told to gear up and get some cold weather clothing and a wizard will teleport them to the side of the mountain. When asked what we might need, that's all the PCs are told by their VC, a VC that was SPECIFICALLY ASKED, might I remind you.
What happens is that at that altitude they can't breathe and everyone who fails their checks can eventually become exhausted due to lack of breathable air, which possibly leave them open to SUPER failure due to -6 STR/-6 DEX or what not.
My beef, you've got lvl. 7 pathfinder, these are friggin PROVEN OPERATORS and you call them up from their day at the beach and tell them we're going to send you up a mountain, into some rough terrain and they are not even told how to survive. Even the hint of, "Hey maybe you might want to get some high altitude gear, just so that you can breathe," might have been nice. But no, they're sent to their potential deaths without being give this basic information. Get some breathing masks, get some altitude sickness herbs, heck no.
At some point these lvl. 7s might loose a friend among the group, after essentially being unprepared for this, with no way to get home. I want someone at Paizo to tell me what would prevent these same proven operators from coming down the mountain, finding the VC and cutting his throat, burning the body and sending the skull to Absalom's Decemvirate, as a warning to other VCs who decide to throw the lives of powerful Pathfinders away, without any information that might keep them alive?
At what point do VCs feel so damn arrogant and safe that they wouldn't simply be wet-worked by their wet-works team, that they wouldn't provide this sort of information. And since the VC has a WIZARD who knows the place well enough to teleport them there, obviously they have feet on the ground who would know that there would be a very real chance of possible failure, due to such conditions. So, why isn't this info provided? Why aren't pathfinders who ask, not told how to prep. And why aren't the VCs preping them?
And trust me, at lvl. 11-13 the VC might get away with lvl. 1-3 Pathfinders going rogue but a party of 6 lvl. 7s coming to get some would be a different matter. Don't care how tough any of them are, a party of successful lvl. 7 Pathfinders, isn't going to fail in the assassination of a PFS VC.
So, why are these adventures written so poorly and where's the Paizo quality control? And don't tell me I need a knowledge local or a knowledge survival, you can fail one of these and get nothing. The VC's knowledge and that of the VC's staff, does know this stuff, even if the players don't. This sort of info should be provided, not made to leave the PCs specifically in the dark.
|
|
Yeah. You basically need to make those Fort saves.
I am unsure whether the scenario has altitude as one of the questions. If it does your GM messed up. If not, your GM should have let you all make a survival or Knowledge Geography check and find out that kind of info.
A necklace of adaptation will let you be happy but 9,000 is a steep price.
Elixir of the Peaks will do it for 8 hours at a cost of 2,450.
|
The scenario takes care of the number of fort saves by using the "prolonged exposure to high altitude" rules and just having you make a check at every significant point. You're at it for so long that you are pretty much guaranteed to be fatigued by the end.
But yeah, the same thing happened to me when I played it. Some of the players were familiar with the altitude rules and specifically asked the VC about hazards, but all he told us was "it gets kinda cold." It really depends on how the GM runs it. There are checks that can be made for information but if no one succeeds I personally feel its reasonable that characters asking about a well-known landmark would find out about the fatiguing effects of the height. It's a bit of a thorny problem because you can certainly say that is what knowledge: local and diplomacy (gather information) are for. But if you are asking about the mountain in the mountaineering shop where you buy your cold weather gear and rope, the proprieter is almost certainly going to be able to tell you more.
I don't have it in front of me but I believe the scenario specifically says the conditions stop at fatigue and never progress to exhausted. It also gives suggested "fixes." (For example, lesser restoration lets you act as normal for one hour.)
|
If you became exhausted due to altitude sickness, then something went terribly wrong. Altitude sickness is a specific condition that gives you a specific set of penalties, and you cannot contract it multiple times. This is stated fairly clearly in a sidebar in the adventure. That said, if you also fail saves against the cold weather, you can contract hypothermia, which does stack with the altitude sickness and makes you exhausted. In addition to Lab Rat's comments, altitude sickness can also be countered by a Bottle of Air (7,250gp) or Life Bubble (a 3rd to 5th level spell) or temporarily by anything that removes fatigue.
It's true that the scenario doesn't make the consequences of altitude sickness readily apparent. When I ran it, I added a section about it to Muesello's speech, ending with "Without magical aid, it's not a question of if you'll become affected, but when." That said, you are also told that: "Again, it’s at the top of a mountain, a mountain that’s always covered in snow. Plan accordingly." Level 7 PCs should be more than capable of rolling knowledge checks about a well known mountaineering hazard.
While the scenario isn't perfect, it's not nearly so guilty as you seem to make it out to be. I'd advise taking a deep breath, talking to your GM, and not stabbing anyone.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
So the VC is being blamed because the high level Pathfinders can't cope with standard mountainous terrain? Are college professors blamed when their students don't study and do poorly on exams?
I would agree with this except for one thing: it is in the VC's best interests that the team they send succeeds.
I have often been very confused by scenarios' openings involving VCs that don't properly prepare a team for success. It just seems...misguided. I usually glean information from the "Possible Questions" section that is obvious (such as high altitude information) and give it over freely to the PCs without prompting. To me, that is realistic, far more so than a VC "mother bird" pushing her chick out of the nest.
Edit: I have not read Among the Gods. I suspect the information is in there, however, as the team I played through with was able to get their questions answered properly and be prepared for what was to come. Either that or our GM had similar leanings toward my own opinion of a VC's best interests.
|
|
So the VC is being blamed because the high level Pathfinders can't cope with standard mountainous terrain? Are college professors blamed when their students don't study and do poorly on exams?
I think the issue the Original Poster has with it (and the same problem my group has) is that they specifically asked to try to find out about these problems and weren't given any information. We were aware altitude sickness could be an issue, but the VC basically blew it off as "don't worry about it, it's not high enough to matter (though it might get cold)."
Or to use a college analogy: students ask the TA "Will section 4.6 be on the test? It's in the reading but we haven't covered it in class."
Response: "Section 4.2 is what you need to concentrate on."
I went back and skimmed the scenario again. There are no specific skill checks to get information about Antios's Crown. The extent of what the VC tells you (in box text or response to questions) is "Again, it’s at the top of a mountain, a mountain that’s always covered in snow. Plan accordingly." After that it's all GM. Nothing tells the GM what he or she should or should not tell the players. We asked about altitude effects, but the GM just said "it gets cold." Some may take the position that all you get is what the VC tells you, others may pass along altitude issues and solutions if you ask, others will just volunteer it.
I don't know how much of the original post was tongue in cheek, but I hope everything from about the halfway point on was not serious. The Pathfinder Society is REALLY not about wet-works teams (though it may seem that way some times). The description of PC reactions made me think "Hmmm, now we know why so many Pathfinders jump ship to the Aspis Consortium."
|
|
As Belafon said, my thread was tongue-in-cheek, but tongue-in-cheek with a purpose. Imagine a squad of USN Seals taken from the beach at San Diego and told, in 3 hours we'll teleport you on top of a 9,000 foot mountain, prepare accordingly, its really cold. Well, the SEAL team would be like
"Ok, what do we need to succeed in our mission?"
"Oh, just grab some warm clothes. You should be fine."
They arrive there instantaneously from 0 altitude to 9,000 feet above see water. Guess what happens to them?
No matter how badass they are. Serious nose bleeds, hemorrhaging, can't breathe and are suffocating just by walking for more than an hour. You know, the usual stuff that happens to people who aren't acclimated for that sort of altitude, weather and living conditions. And aren't prepared for it, with oxygen tanks.
That's when the survivors come down the mountain, go rogue and kill their commanding officer for sending them and their friends, to their deaths.
You know, the usual stuff when you attempt to kill of successful and resourceful survivors of 20 previous missions, because you think you're so tough you can take on an entire 'kill team' of well trained and highly successful, "PROVEN OPERATORS."
-
I mean common folks, at a certain point the Decemvirate would start running out of VCs if these sort of asses were the only ones hired for the job.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
Drogon makes the assumption that the VCs actually want the agents to succeed.
Or even live.
Don't.
Heh. Fair. I get the fact that you're being tongue-in-cheek, however:
It would certainly be a semi-amusing feature of the campaign if that were the case. But why? The premise is the discovery and cataloging of rare antiquities. VCs earn fame through the exploits of the teams they get to do their dirty work. If they were like Todd suggests (uncaring of whether a party succeeds) or like TetsujinOni suggests (actively interested in seeing them fail) then the Society would have long ago imploded in the way Eric and Cardamus are suggesting.
There are already plenty of players out there who think it's amusing to actively argue with the VCs while "in character" and accuse them of being incompetent fools. I don't really see how that perception enhances the campaign (or any individual game). Thus, I provide information and prompt its gathering. I think my tables appreciate actually knowing the story.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Back in October, the Paizo Blog ran a "Pathfinder Survival 101" column. It recommended:
Potion of Invigorate (50 gp): Going into battle with a creature that can sap your endurance, leaving you fatigued or exhausted, this potion will banish that pathetic mortal weakness and allow you to ignore the associated penalties for 10 WHOLE MINUTES. Of course, when it runs out, you get not only the penalties, but also an extra d6 points of nonlethal damage for your arrogance in ignoring your natural limits—but hey, performance enhancements are just an easy way of separating winners from losers! Honestly, though, ignoring those penalties for 10 minutes, that's freaking awesome for 50 gp.
|
|
What happens is that at that altitude they can't breathe and everyone who fails their checks can eventually become exhausted due to lack of breathable air, which possibly leave them open to SUPER failure due to -6 STR/-6 DEX or what not.
BTW- This should only ever leave the PC's fatigued, not exhausted. You just can't shake the fatigue (via non-magical means), until you go down the mountain and get to more breathable air. It's a debuff on the party, but not as bad as the -6/-6 you have, only -2/-2.
Venture-Lieutenant, West Virginia—Charleston
|
I think that part of the problem is that many of the solutions to high altitude are either too expensive for the majority of Pathfinders in that level range, or they were not printed in a core book at the time of Among the Gods' printing. Remember, Ultimate Equipment wasn't out then, so nothing there would have been mentioned. Also, I can imagine that Paizo would feel a bit uncomfortable recommending anything outside of a non-core book for fear of looking like they're trying to sell books under a pay to win scheme.
This scenario is far from unwinnable, and it sounds as if your GM just didn't think to outline some of the more common remedies.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There seem to be two issues here: in-game and out-of-game.
In-game: It is not a V-C's job to train Pathfinders for their mission, especially at 7th level. Of course, if a Pathfinder would ask a question like, "how do I survive on this mountaintop?", the V-C should provide that information, or at least where to find it (along with a roll of the eyes...)
"Really? You're still asking me to hold your hand? Why don't you go talk to Thaddeus in the library, he can fill you in on the dangers of mountain climbing. I'm a bit busy to run a remedial survival class right now." Good old Thaddeus could then pull out the atlas, look at the mountaintop in question, and say, "Hmm, 15,000 feet... it'll be cold, and the air's thin up there. You'd best be prepared for the following symptoms..." and so on.
Out-of-game: it is not the GM's job to re-read the Core Rulebook to players, especially at 7th level. Environmental hazards are detailed in both the Core Rulebook and the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, both of which are assumed to be known by all players.
A caveat on this: if the PCs ask a question, the GM should answer it truthfully. Either the mountain is high enough to have altitude effects, or it's not. The GM knows the answer, and shouldn't hand-wave it and then spring it on the PCs later.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Re-reading the OP, it looks like the party was indeed told that they were going to be on a mountain, and the complaint is just that they weren't told the exact countermeasures necessary.
I think my reply to this complaint could best be summed up by taking this post (specifically the final three paragraphs) and replacing "adamantine bullets" with "potions of invigorate".
|
|
Scott, the problem is that there's a disconnect in your argument.
The players have no idea how high the mountain is, nor do the characters. There's a long way from "its cold" to "There's no air". The height of a specific mountain isn't something you expect the party to know. if the mountain is ridiculously famous (like Everest) then its something the DM has to tell the players.
|
There seem to be two issues here: in-game and out-of-game.
In-game: It is not a V-C's job to train Pathfinders for their mission, especially at 7th level. Of course, if a Pathfinder would ask a question like, "how do I survive on this mountaintop?", the V-C should provide that information, or at least where to find it (along with a roll of the eyes...)
"Really? You're still asking me to hold your hand? Why don't you go talk to Thaddeus in the library, he can fill you in on the dangers of mountain climbing. I'm a bit busy to run a remedial survival class right now." Good old Thaddeus could then pull out the atlas, look at the mountaintop in question, and say, "Hmm, 15,000 feet... it'll be cold, and the air's thin up there. You'd best be prepared for the following symptoms..." and so on.
Out-of-game: it is not the GM's job to re-read the Core Rulebook to players, especially at 7th level. Environmental hazards are detailed in both the Core Rulebook and the Pathfinder Society Field Guide, both of which are assumed to be known by all players.
A caveat on this: if the PCs ask a question, the GM should answer it truthfully. Either the mountain is high enough to have altitude effects, or it's not. The GM knows the answer, and shouldn't hand-wave it and then spring it on the PCs later.
This!
|
Having recently GMed this one, I've got two things to point out.
1. The PCs are teleported to the base of the mountain specifically because nobody knows the area they're traveling to at the top well enough to send them there, or warn them what to expect.
2. The GM messed up in not warning the PCs that the atmosphere might be a little thin. There probably should have been knowledge checks involved (I don't remember off the top of my head). The players should have been responsible for finding their own solutions, though a knowledgeable GM might offer suggestions. Given that the BBEG uses Lesser Restoration for that very purpose, it's one that every GM should know about.
I'll also mention that when I saw the title of the thread, this wasn't the rant I was expecting. My biggest complaint about this scenario is that the whole thing revolves around a BBEG that comes out of nowhere, and the PCs never have any hints of what's going on. They find these traps along the way and have no way of even guessing they were intentionally set by this guy. Then at the end, this guy shows up, and the players are just like "Who the heck are you and what do you have to do with this adventure?"
|
|
My biggest complaint about this scenario is that the whole thing revolves around a BBEG that comes out of nowhere, and the PCs never have any hints of what's going on. They find these traps along the way and have no way of even guessing they were intentionally set by this guy. Then at the end, this guy shows up, and the players are just like "Who the heck are you and what do you have to do with this adventure?"
Obviously then, you didn't play the 1st two "Among the..." scenarios if this was a complaint, or at the very least not an expectation.
|
|
Obviously then, you didn't play the 1st two "Among the..." scenarios if this was a complaint, or at the very least not an expectation.My biggest complaint about this scenario is that the whole thing revolves around a BBEG that comes out of nowhere, and the PCs never have any hints of what's going on. They find these traps along the way and have no way of even guessing they were intentionally set by this guy. Then at the end, this guy shows up, and the players are just like "Who the heck are you and what do you have to do with this adventure?"
Yes, I did. But there's nothing in the adventure to connect them until the BBEG shows up at the very end and starts ranting. And then the players sit there going "You were involved in that earlier thing? Why haven't I heard of you?" It's kind of a jarring disconnect.
More than any other PFS scenario, the final fight just doesn't feel like it relates to the rest of the adventure, from the players' point of view. The GM has additional information about how it all ties together, but that's all revealed to the players after the fact. It doesn't flow naturally at all. At least if it was a random dungeon crawl, the BBEG wouldn't be acting like there's a connection when the players don't have any clue what that connection is.
|
|
Actually, we sort of expected someone who set the traps to be on top of the mountain. Those traps that were making us jumpy, made us plenty suspicious. After you have a triggered rockslide because you have high perception, so you see the trap but ZERO disable device, so you still have to set it off, you kinda get the hint that someone's messing with your party.
The strange thing to me was that hey, I don't know how high the mountain is. But if you tell me I can make a 2 day climb of 8 hours each and get to the top, ok, its going to be cold but I'm not climbing Mt. Everest. And if I ask the VC if I need specific gear, I expect a little give from the VC who won't just blow me off and tell me to wear a warm sweater and a winbreaker.
At an altitude where the air is that thin, IMHO warm weather gear ain't getting it done, is my thinking. Are we talking -20 to -40 Fahrenheit? Do you piss icicles at this point? And how far can a mountain climber climb in 16 hours, because a Pathfinder is not a Mountain Climber? 10,000 feet? Seriously?
The way I understood climbing mountains, you're not getting more than a 1,000 feet per day done. And at 2,000 feet, its going to be chilly but you aren't loosing body parts to frost-bite.
Any mountain climbers here, who might educate the rest of us? Am I off, or does this module make sense?
|
Heh. I actually loved this scenario because my bard Charmed the BBEG and got him to explain the entire plot while the rest of the party was healing. It was a great plot twist, and I had a fantastic time roleplaying the conversation. Also he got to use Triple Time to cut down the amount of time we spent climbing the mountain. But mind control on the BBEG is just about the only way you could possibly understand the plot as a player.
|
|
Going by the rules in the Core Rulebook for overland movement, it seems about right.
Assuming a base land speed of 30 ft or 20 ft. We are traveling on a path on mountain terrain so x3/4 movement.
30*3/4=22.5 ft speed
20*3/4=15 ft speed
At 20 foot move speed you travel 16 miles per day, and at 15 foot move speed you travel 12 miles per day. Break that down into paths that wind around the mountain as they go up. You could easily reach 5000 ft or higher on day 1 using this system of measurement. Is it realistic? I don't know, I've never climbed mountain paths on foot.
As for the being unprepared for the scenario. The VC does specifically say that you are going to be teleported to a mountain. He also tells you to "plan accordingly". A group of accomplished pathfinders should surely know the dangers associated with climbing a mountain. I called for a knowledge(geography) check DC 15 and imparted the information about high altitudes making people fatigued. This prompted everyone to invest in some lesser restoration potions/scrolls. They were very happy to have a paladin with them that could get rid of fatigue when combat started.
|
|
And mind you, I was the cleric and I always keep 3 lesser restorations chambered and a Paladin along with us, so no issue on that either. For MY party.
I was talking afterwards to a player (played on a different scenario, at a different table) who played this previously and they got hosed doing this. Me specifically, I got lucky with my preset spells and one of the PCs ate it for a different reason. But if we got trumped on the whole exhaustion thing the way the other player did, I'd really want some VC blood to flow.
The other thing is, the way our PC ate it was because the GM didn't have the updated rules for fighting the ghost/ghast/whatever and didn't know that our channel energy should not get the 50% dodge bonus, due to a change in Bestiary I, 2 years ago. Again, it would be nice if some of these scenarios got an update so that people who have a PDF could actually look and see that "Hey, this monster should be played differently than Beastiary I says in the original printing." None of us knew about this until after the game and one of our players had to spend 20PP to get a resurrection due to a rule that no one knew.
|
|
And mind you, I was the cleric and I always keep 3 lesser restorations chambered and a Paladin along with us, so no issue on that either. For MY party.
I was talking afterwards to a player (played on a different scenario, at a different table) who played this previously and they got hosed doing this. Me specifically, I got lucky with my preset spells and one of the PCs ate it for a different reason. But if we got trumped on the whole exhaustion thing the way the other player did, I'd really want some VC blood to flow.
The other thing is, the way our PC ate it was because the GM didn't have the updated rules for fighting the ghost/ghast/whatever and didn't know that our channel energy should not get the 50% dodge bonus, due to a change in Bestiary I, 2 years ago. Again, it would be nice if some of these scenarios got an update so that people who have a PDF could actually look and see that "Hey, this monster should be played differently than Beastiary I says in the original printing." None of us knew about this until after the game and one of our players had to spend 20PP to get a resurrection due to a rule that no one knew.
Can you explain more clearly what it is that changed and why it affected how the Ghoul attacked? I'm really unclear on what you are talking about here.
|
|
He had a hide bonus. So he was using the original rules that allow him to have a 50% dodge. So he dodged us 4 times in a row and then rolled well on the resists. Because of it, one of the PCs ate it.
Yeah it sucked but at 10PM at night no one had any reason to believe that this projection should not get the 50% dodge bonus. It wasn't until later that we found out that there should have been no DODGE bonus to force effects, which is what Channel Positive Energy is.
I mean that is minutia that isn't common knowledge to most GMs, unless you're a Rules Scholar. That should be provided in the scenario or at least in the PDF version and needs to be updated.
|
|
What's a 50% dodge bonus? I've never heard of that terminology.
Are you referring to the 50% miss chance for total concealment?
I've also never heard of "force effects" being able to ignore total concealment. So not sure what you mean by that.
Positive Energy is NOT a force effect. Its positive energy.
But it is area of effect. Area of Effect does ignore concealment.
I don't recall this ever being part of the game system that you'd get a concealment 50% miss chance on area of effect abilities and/or spells.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Are we talking about the 50% miss chance from displacement that a berbalang's body gets while it does its projection thingy? If so, it would only affect attacks (not AoE's like Channeled Energy) and only apply to the body (not the incorporeal half).
Are we talking about the D&D 3.5 version of incorporeality where everything had a 50% chance of not affecting it? If so, then what the GM missed was not a piece of after-the-Bestiary rules minutae.
Are we talking about something else entirely?
|
|
Originally, channeling positive energy was lumped in with all other spell effects, and the 50% reduction in damage for incorporeal creatures. The current rule is that channel does full damage, like force effects, to incorporeal.
I 'think' that's what he's trying to say when he's talking about dodge bonuses and such.
|
|
Yes, sorry, I didn't GM this. But it was total concealment.
Apparently in the original rules you did get it and the GM playing it played it as such. So me and the other cleric who shot two Positive Energy shots at this thing, didn't get a hit, we both tried it for 2 rounds and 0 hp dmg.
When this happened, one of our guys climbed the pillar and saw the thing controlling it. Went after it and it went right back into its own body, paralyzed him and then coup de graced him. Eventually we got up there and killed it but this wouldn't have been an issue, if we were able to go up the rock face together by being able to kill the Undead Projection with our Channel Energy abilities.
And when it did hit on a 3rd attempt, he had a 50% reduction and rolled a save so he only got hit with 25% of the damage.
|
|
He got both the dodge bonus and the 50% damage reduction. You can only imagine what that player had to say about the GM after the session, out of earshot. And since I don't know the rules, I was like, ok, don't know how this works so I have to go home and research.
Problem is this should have been UPDATED in the PDF at least to give the GM some help. I don't blame the GM, he was just playing it as written and he doesn't run scenarios that often in our store, so he had no real help from the Paizo product.
|
|
He got both the dodge bonus and the 50% damage reduction. You can only imagine what that player had to say about the GM after the session, out of earshot. And since I don't know the rules, I was like, ok, don't know how this works so I have to go home and research.
Problem is this should have been UPDATED in the PDF at least to give the GM some help. I don't blame the GM, he was just playing it as written and he doesn't run scenarios that often in our store, so he had no real help from the Paizo product.
The scenario .pdf didn't have anything wrong in it. The GM was just making a mistake. Area of effect other than channel automatically hit for 50%, save for 25%. Channel hits for 100% save for 50%. The only possible way to misconstrue any of this based on old printings is if he has a super old CRB, in which case he might incorrectly have channels do 50% save for 25% (but, crucially, still no fail chance).
|
|
A nice two line explanation, saying something to the effect of
"Channels against Undead should get a 100% damage, save for 50% and NO Total Concealment bonus against Channel or AOE."
Would have saved the PC and would have let the players have fun, rather than a death. Two lines, not a hard fix. Please add it Paizo, so that others don't get hosed like this in the future.
Plus, now We don't know if these players will come back to our future sessions because of this, so it might have cost our own high level group potential players. We are looking for high level PCs to show up in the store, so that we can run some high level scenarios and these folks would have been a perfect fit. Now we might not see them again. I feel bad for the 3 players, one of who died and I feel bad for our own players who might miss out on playing some scenarios because we don't have enough lvl. 7s.