5-16 Destiny of the Sands, Part 3: Sanctum of the Sages - GM Discussion


GM Discussion

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm going to go with either intentional, or oversight, but pg 24, the Graven Guardian, has a Keen Quarterstaff. Keen not being normally allowed on a bludgeoning weapon. It also doesn't show up on the Chronicle, so I am assuming it is "unique" to the statue, and a part of the statue, so it just an oddity.

3/5

Its actually part of the Graven Guardian creature, called out in its stat block

Graven Guardian wrote:
Magic Weapon (Su) A graven guardian that carries its deity's favored weapon treats that weapon as a +1 weapon as long as it is wielded by the guardian. If the weapon is a melee weapon, it gains the keen weapon special ability (even if the weapon is a bludgeoning weapon). If it is a thrown weapon, it gains the returning weapon special ability. If it is a ranged weapon, it gains the seeking weapon special ability, and generates new ammunition with each attack (this ammunition is destroyed whether or not it hits).

Edit: By the way, I'm loving the read through, though I know of players that will sigh long and hard at the chase scene.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

*edit* Beat me there :)

Never mind just went and read Graven Guardian, that is a awesome monster from a mechanic and flavour perspective.

Dark Archive 5/5 *

this guardian also appeared in a season 4 mod.
it gets its deitys fav. weapon and it is keen.

edit: the guardian is in a season 3 mod not 4. I just remembered.
if has favored weapon of its deity, the weapon is considered +1 and is keen if it's a melee weapon.

Grand Lodge 4/5

I'm certainly pumped to run this, although I'm sad that Amenopheus never actually fights alongside the PCs.

Also, I'm wondering how many groups will think to try solving the puzzle instead of fighting the combat.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

From quickly skimming through - it looks like Sands Part 1 isn't linked into 2&3 at all except for the osirion faction boon getting another +1. Am I correct on that?

Grand Lodge 4/5

thistledown wrote:
From quickly skimming through - it looks like Sands Part 1 isn't linked into 2&3 at all except for the osirion faction boon getting another +1. Am I correct on that?

If you don't play Part 2 you don't get a full suite of mythic powers to play with in Part 3, but rather a simplified template.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Jeff Merola wrote:

I'm certainly pumped to run this, although I'm sad that Amenopheus never actually fights alongside the PCs.

Also, I'm wondering how many groups will think to try solving the puzzle instead of fighting the combat.

You sort of have to do both, I think the trial and error nature of the puzzle, that is even if you figure out what you have to do, you still have to get "the right" statues which the GMs are supposed to randomize to some extent. So somebody has to hold the statues at bay, which is possible given their tactics, while other PCs run about doing the lights. Still even if you defeat the statues, don't you still have to solve the puzzle?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Galnörag wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:

I'm certainly pumped to run this, although I'm sad that Amenopheus never actually fights alongside the PCs.

Also, I'm wondering how many groups will think to try solving the puzzle instead of fighting the combat.

You sort of have to do both, I think the trial and error nature of the puzzle, that is even if you figure out what you have to do, you still have to get "the right" statues which the GMs are supposed to randomize to some extent. So somebody has to hold the statues at bay, which is possible given their tactics, while other PCs run about doing the lights. Still even if you defeat the statues, don't you still have to solve the puzzle?

You only have to solve the puzzle OR fight the combat. If you solve the puzzle mid combat, combat ends. If you beat the combat the Develoment text notes "If the PCs defeat the constructs before solving the puzzle, they are easily able to determine the appropriate configuration of lamps through trial and error."

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

Jeff Merola wrote:
thistledown wrote:
From quickly skimming through - it looks like Sands Part 1 isn't linked into 2&3 at all except for the osirion faction boon getting another +1. Am I correct on that?
If you don't play Part 2 you don't get a full suite of mythic powers to play with in Part 3, but rather a simplified template.

Yes, Parts 2&3 are quite importantly linked together. Part 1... not so much.

Scarab Sages 4/5 5/5 **

Thematically you need Part 1 actually, because part way through Part 3 you find out that Kafar and Nefti sold the Emerald Gem of Plauges to Torch, and Part 1 (re)introduces you to that character and gives some players a bit of a reason to hate him.

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thistledown wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
thistledown wrote:
From quickly skimming through - it looks like Sands Part 1 isn't linked into 2&3 at all except for the osirion faction boon getting another +1. Am I correct on that?
If you don't play Part 2 you don't get a full suite of mythic powers to play with in Part 3, but rather a simplified template.
Yes, Parts 2&3 are quite importantly linked together. Part 1... not so much.

Right, misread what you posted. Part 1 is linked thematically because of the whole business with Torch. Now, if your players don't care about Torch for whatever reason, then yeah, it's not very important.

3/5

Part 1 is important because it gives the PCs the direction to the area in part 2. Its the important thing that they understand just why it is that their hunting these jewels down.

Grand Lodge 5/5

thistledown wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
thistledown wrote:
From quickly skimming through - it looks like Sands Part 1 isn't linked into 2&3 at all except for the osirion faction boon getting another +1. Am I correct on that?
If you don't play Part 2 you don't get a full suite of mythic powers to play with in Part 3, but rather a simplified template.
Yes, Parts 2&3 are quite importantly linked together. Part 1... not so much.

It's worth noting that part 3 begins in Eto, where part 1 was set. Time permitting, you could expand on the information gathering at the outset of #3 by allowing PCs a chance to contact important NPCs from #1, both as a roleplay reward for participating in all three scenarios and to help tie 1 and 3 together.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

Damien_DM wrote:
thistledown wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
thistledown wrote:
From quickly skimming through - it looks like Sands Part 1 isn't linked into 2&3 at all except for the osirion faction boon getting another +1. Am I correct on that?
If you don't play Part 2 you don't get a full suite of mythic powers to play with in Part 3, but rather a simplified template.
Yes, Parts 2&3 are quite importantly linked together. Part 1... not so much.
It's worth noting that part 3 begins in Eto, where part 1 was set. Time permitting, you could expand on the information gathering at the outset of #3 by allowing PCs a chance to contact important NPCs from #1, both as a roleplay reward for participating in all three scenarios and to help tie 1 and 3 together.

Very true! Just remember that a particular someone has left town since Part 1.

Spoiler:
That being Grandmaster Torch

Grand Lodge 3/5

Part I is a bit more important than I thought it was... I have players chomping at the bit for more storyline on Grandmaster Torch.

Shadow Lodge 4/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Tell me about it.... Running this tomorrow, and I figure when my group figures out they get a 'vote' they'll write in a certain information broker . I can hear it already, 'He's a sage,, he has a jewel, doesn't he?"

5/5 5/55/55/5

Part 1 is more connected to something else down the line.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 *

I am confused about page 14 and the accumulation of chase points for the PCs. The way the scenario reads if the PCs have more than less chase points Nefti and Kafar start further away... shouldn't it be closer?

Chase Spoiler:
If the PCs have 2 Chase Points or fewer, the
agents begin in the Cliff ’s Edge square. If the PCs have
between 3 and 6 Chase Points, the agents begin in the
Crack in the Mountain square. If the PCs have 6 or more
Chase Points, the agents begin in the Quicksand Patch
square. In addition, if the PCs have 10 or more Chase
Points, the PCs also gain a surprise round.

Grand Lodge 3/5

Hey Cronge, here's what I'm seeing.

The PCs start with 5, but can get as many as 12, but as few as 0.

The PCs start at High Ground.
>2 = Cliff's Edge, or 5 spaces away from the PCs.
3-6 = Crack in the Mountain, or 4 spaces away from the PCs.
6< = Quicksand Patch, or 3 spaces away from the PCs.
10< = PCs get a surprise round.

So the more points the PCs have, the closer the thieves are to the PCs. My only point of confusion is the 6 point range because that means the thieves can start either on Crack in the Mountain or Quicksand Patch. Personally, I'm going to say that if the PCs have 3-5, the thieves will start on Crack in the Mountain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow. There are a lot of words in this scenario.

Shadow Lodge 2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

When I first read the scenario, I had the same reaction as Cronge - however, when I reexamined it, I discovered the arrows alternate directions, which I had not noticed, so they ARE actually closer with a higher total of chase points.

Grand Lodge 3/5

Just a note on my post, I made an error. 0-2 the thieves start in Cliffs Edge.

1/5 **

Ok, just ran this. Very dense, lots going on. Overall I liked it. A few comments:

  • If Nefti/Kafar aren't caught during the chase, all that really seems to change is where they encounter the characters. The text says that they cast more spells, but doesn't say which, and it seems like they've already buffed either way. Also, why would they reveal the entrance to the sanctum for so little tactical advantage?

  • I'm new to mythic, and it took me a while to realize that the mythic simple templates do not grants the mythic sub-type. Just a potential gotcha for others who may not know the rules.

  • Wow, the third boon on that sheet is nasty. So is the behir in the upper sub-tier.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Bloody amazing scenario. Looking forward to digging in for my run and getting a better feel for what was going on. bugleyman would have killed our halfling barbarian about three times over if the party hadn't pulled together.

4/5

I ran this tonight and at the end it says if your party comes up with a different solution, post it, so I am doing so:

My group sought a compromise, giving both sides what they desired. Since both sides were bound by the decision, the part split 4-2 for a leader of the sages, however, they demanded that there be another vote for that. They unanimously voted for Amenopheus since he is already tied to the society.

3/5

Ran it Saturday, everyone enjoyed it. As far as the chase points I read it as having 3 to 5 points Crack in the Mountain, 6+ quicksand.

The Behir wasn't as scary as I thought it would be, but that's mostly because the wizard made a Tiny Hut and the Behir didn't have the spellcraft to realize what had just happened. Then it got shot by the gunslinger... a lot, as it went to investigate this new dome in its domain.

I will say for that chase the players enjoyed it and completely ran through it. A few of them did not choose abilities that led to much mythic point usage and did not need the surge (gunslinger and well-built fighter) so they ended up hoarding the points and destroying the obstacles (and a decent portion of the mountain itself!) on the way to Kafar and Nefti.

Sadly no one wanted to perform the ritual :,(

There was a good 20 minute RP between the players for the decision at the end, each side trying to convince the other, so leave time for this.

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

I enjoyed running it. Even though my dice were cold and even the Behir was somewhat trivial as a result (stupid inquisitor/gunslinger).

I'm hoping someone runs it in abotu 6 months, so I can run Zahara (my new Osirion character) through it.

3/5

If you swing by Dayton I know we'll be running the arc a few times.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

We had a silly and frustrating discussion about breaking through the floor in the beginning. By the rules as written I can shoot an adamantine bullet into the ground and make a hole to climb through in a couple of rounds, but with my mining pick, I can't even break the hardness of the stone...
I was disappointed by this scenario. pointless chase scene and puzzle that was best solved by... ignoring it. Seriously? The solution is brute force of trying every combination. That's lame lazy writing. I'll have to think of an actual puzzle to use for when I run this. The encounter was also too easy so there wasn't even any impetus to try to solve it during the fight.

Grand Lodge 4/5

gnoams wrote:

We had a silly and frustrating discussion about breaking through the floor in the beginning. By the rules as written I can shoot an adamantine bullet into the ground and make a hole to climb through in a couple of rounds, but with my mining pick, I can't even break the hardness of the stone...

I was disappointed by this scenario. pointless chase scene and puzzle that was best solved by... ignoring it. Seriously? The solution is brute force of trying every combination. That's lame lazy writing. I'll have to think of an actual puzzle to use for when I run this. The encounter was also too easy so there wasn't even any impetus to try to solve it during the fight.

Unless you're running it as a homegame that doesn't involve PFS, please remember that you're not allowed to change the scenario. And that includes replacing the puzzle.

Also, a miner's pick does 1d6+(1.5xStr mod) damage per swing. A strength score of 14 or better is sufficient to break through eventually, and mining picks are not exactly the most efficient way of breaking through solid stone anyway.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Our party solved the puzzle to reduce the amount of resources used in case there was a further combat ahead. We weren't entirely sure the Diamond Sage was going to be friendly. Thus two characters took the time to test the puzzle while the rest played defensive line.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

We just took the 12 seconds necessary to kill the golems and moved on.

Actually a pick is pretty much the best (non modern machine)tool for breaking rock, thats what it was designed for. Certainly works way better than a greatsword IRL, but raw even a wimp can break rock with a greatsword, while only a really strong person can break rock with a pick.

As for the puzzle, its vague and tells you to randomly pick something. No reason you can't plan the order of objects in a logical sense, draw out some pictures on cards for the players to rearrange, and describe some mural on the wall that gives you a clue. Pre-planning is not rewriting, that's filling in blank spots left out by the author. Without any sort of logical solution it would be a challenge to keep the golems alive long enough to solve the puzzle.

4/5

gnoams wrote:
Actually a pick is pretty much the best (non modern machine)tool for breaking rock, thats what it was designed for. Certainly works way better than a greatsword IRL, but raw even a wimp can break rock with a greatsword, while only a really strong person can break rock with a pick.

Actually a pick by RAW should be better then a greatsword

Additional Rules wrote:
Ineffective Weapons: Certain weapons just can't effectively deal damage to certain objects. For example, a bludgeoning weapon cannot be used to damage a rope. Likewise, most melee weapons have little effect on stone walls and doors, unless they are designed for breaking up stone, such as a pick or hammer.

Also a GM who feels that a weapon should be more effective can use...

Additional Rules wrote:
Vulnerability to Certain Attacks: Certain attacks are especially successful against some objects. In such cases, attacks deal double their normal damage and may ignore the object's hardness.

To allow a pick to do more damage and actually be useful against stone like it's intended.

But like most of the object and hardness rules it's subject to GM variance.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
gnoams wrote:
We just took the 12 seconds necessary to kill the golems and moved on.

It took us longer than 12 seconds. I actually kited one of the graven guardians via Mirror Dodge for most of the battle.

Grand Lodge 4/5

gnoams wrote:

We just took the 12 seconds necessary to kill the golems and moved on.

Actually a pick is pretty much the best (non modern machine)tool for breaking rock, thats what it was designed for. Certainly works way better than a greatsword IRL, but raw even a wimp can break rock with a greatsword, while only a really strong person can break rock with a pick.

As for the puzzle, its vague and tells you to randomly pick something. No reason you can't plan the order of objects in a logical sense, draw out some pictures on cards for the players to rearrange, and describe some mural on the wall that gives you a clue. Pre-planning is not rewriting, that's filling in blank spots left out by the author. Without any sort of logical solution it would be a challenge to keep the golems alive long enough to solve the puzzle.

First, as the other Jeffrey pointed out, Hardness rules actually state that in most cases a greatsword won't do more than chip the floor.

Second, your original statement was that you would think up "an actual puzzle" to use which heavily implied you were going to completely replace the thing.

3/5

My guys solved the puzzle, only one even tried to really get the golem. I'm thinking the scenario authors were making the scenario based on the boon in part 2, rather than for the book. Most of my table had the boon, only one guy had the book. The combat lasted 6 rounds with the party trying to solve the puzzle. And yes before-hand I determined what statues were holding the lanterns, which ones looked like the Ruby, Sapphire, Emerald, and Topaz sages, and where they should go.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jeff Merola wrote:

I'm certainly pumped to run this, although I'm sad that Amenopheus never actually fights alongside the PCs.

He's a sage and a Patron. His whole order was a group of librarians after all. Fighting is what underlings and Pathfinders are for. :) Besides he does rather consider it a test of how Pathfinders handle what's been given to them.

Grand Lodge 4/5

LazarX wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:

I'm certainly pumped to run this, although I'm sad that Amenopheus never actually fights alongside the PCs.

He's a sage and a Patron. His whole order was a group of librarians after all. Fighting is what underlings and Pathfinders are for. :) Besides he does rather consider it a test of how Pathfinders handle what's been given to them.

He does fight, though. He just doesn't fight alongside the PCs.

Paizo Employee 4/5 Developer

GM Hills wrote:

I ran this tonight and at the end it says if your party comes up with a different solution, post it, so I am doing so:

My group sought a compromise, giving both sides what they desired. Since both sides were bound by the decision, the part split 4-2 for a leader of the sages, however, they demanded that there be another vote for that. They unanimously voted for Amenopheus since he is already tied to the society.

I have started a thread for this purpose in the Faction Talk sub-forum.

Grand Lodge 4/5

I just noticed a small, rather inconsequential error in the Mythic Glass Golem's stat block. It mentions "blinding brightness" in the Offense section of the stat block, but the ability is actually called "Dazzling Brightness" in the Special Attack section.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

Any advice you can provide or hints for running this, I will be GMing several times at PaizoCon and would love to here any fun anecdotes or ideas you had while running this that I can shamelessly steal and use there.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Nathan Hartshorn wrote:
My guys solved the puzzle, only one even tried to really get the golem. I'm thinking the scenario authors were making the scenario based on the boon in part 2, rather than for the book. Most of my table had the boon, only one guy had the book. The combat lasted 6 rounds with the party trying to solve the puzzle. And yes before-hand I determined what statues were holding the lanterns, which ones looked like the Ruby, Sapphire, Emerald, and Topaz sages, and where they should go.

That's true, using the templates from 2 or 3 instead of the full mythic rules is definitely much less of a power boost. I played in a slot 0 of all GM's, so we were all using the book.

I was disappointed you don't run in to the archaeologist from part one who was supposed to be leading an expedition to the same place.

The whole thing felt a little anti climatic to me. You get imbued with super powers and all you end up doing is chasing a couple of normal schmucks. Never felt like we were doing anything requiring us to have been imbued with mythic power to do, so what was the point in having it? I guess the golems fight is supposed to be the final showdown, I'm trying to think of ways to make it seem more climactic at that point, but so far I'm drawing a blank.

3/5

Nothing in the scenario "required" mythic as far as well built PCs go, but the pregens and less optimized PCs will have a tougher time with the fights, especially if they are only using the templates. I would very much not want to run this scenario for a group of new people using 4th or 7th level pregens as I feel this would be throwing far too much at them initially.

As for the golem fight I'm sure that it will vary by group. Some groups will have the wits and skills necessary to pick up that there is a puzzle and others will just want to smash face. I did end up telling my group "You can just attack the golem and the guardians and that'll do it for you." Their response, both surprising and delighting was "No! There's a puzzle and we're going to solve it!"

Sidenote about my own group: I did have one person completely new to PFS, though not Pathfinder and he commented about having to learn a lot after the game ended. It took a bit longer than I would like convincing him that this is probably just a test to see if and how mythic fits into PFS.

Edit: I also agree about the archeologist. When I heard this takes place in the Pillars of the Sun I was sure he would show up. Maybe Amenopheus dealt with him?

Scarab Sages 4/5 5/5 **

One thing that should make the final fight harder is applying the invincible mythic template to the Graven Guardians. Since it isn't in the pdf, most GM's might miss it, but boosting the AC by 2 for a party of 3-4's and adding in 5 energy resist turns them into a serious threat. My party was lucky to have a void sorcerer that could split magic missiles to keep the statues from casting haste.

Grand Lodge 4/5

Dokomo wrote:
One thing that should make the final fight harder is applying the invincible mythic template to the Graven Guardians. Since it isn't in the pdf, most GM's might miss it, but boosting the AC by 2 for a party of 3-4's and adding in 5 energy resist turns them into a serious threat. My party was lucky to have a void sorcerer that could split magic missiles to keep the statues from casting haste.

Graven Guardians have 6 HD, so they gain DR 5/epic and Resist All Energy 10, not 5. That means you need an Epic Adamantine weapon to bypass their DR normally. And how would splitting Magic Missiles stop Haste anyway? Was he readying an action to cast when they did? Because their tactics are use Haste and then start hitting things.

2/5 *

I just seen in the scenario that the two thiefs have been in a adventure before with something called the belt of obedience (I only know that the name was written somewhere in the library of the lion.)

What was the adventures they were?

Grand Lodge 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The Devil We Know Part I and IV.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5

Gayel Nord wrote:

I just seen in the scenario that the two thiefs have been in a adventure before with something called the belt of obedience (I only know that the name was written somewhere in the library of the lion.)

What was the adventures they were?

And it is actually the Bell of Obedience, just to clarify.

4/5

Quick question that is not specific to this adventure, but relevant. Does a Young behir's breath weapon damage drop to 7d4? If not, what? (Translation: What's one damage die step down from 7d6?)

1 to 50 of 164 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / GM Discussion / 5-16 Destiny of the Sands, Part 3: Sanctum of the Sages - GM Discussion All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.