| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, they'll be up later today!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How do Roleplaying Guild characters partake in Adventure Card Guild adventures? (The Faction Cards being character rather than player specific after all.)
[Please note; having not actually played a Adventure Card Guild adventure, I could be missing something obvious.]
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
Very interesting. Of course I have questions/comments...
- Grand Lodge/Scarab Sages - ACG games. Very interesting. I assume you can achieve this when borrowing a deck from someone? As a way to get people to try out the card game a few times, well, I'm up for it.
Would like to hear how it works with applying credit to specific PCs though.
-
Participate in an adventure that features Grandmaster Torch, Pasha Muhlia al-Jakri, or Thurl. Faction missions do not fulfill this goal.
Isn't this a bit over-specific? Although there's some scenarios with Torch in the name or blurb, otherwise you need foreknowledge of scenarios to seat the right PC at the right table to achieve this. And one of those people ought to be dead. (All of them should be, really.)
-
Convince an NPC who serves an oppressive or tyrannical leader to abandon that leader of their own free will by succeeding at a Diplomacy or Perform (oratory) check with a DC equal to 15 + your character level.
How does this work? Is this something we try against NPC opponents? Doesn't that derail plots, because that DC isn't very high? Or is it something you do to random people on the streets of Cheliax ("move to Andoran, you don't have to sacrifice quite so many people")?
It pushes the question of how recruiting NPCs interacts with encountering NPC opponents.
-
Dissuade an NPC from working with an organization that directly opposes the Pathfinder Society or the Sovereign Court’s goals during an adventure by presenting the NPC with evidence that doing so is contrary to her interests. This requires a successful Bluff, Intimidate, Knowledge (local), or Sense Motive check with a DC equal to 15 + your character level.
Same problem as Liberty's Edge. Do we need to seek out specific NPCs that oppose the Society, but just not enough to be part of the scenario's plot?
APSIS PROFITEER
Typo.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hello, Morales. Meet my sap.Morale: Fights to the death.Liberty's Edge/ Sovereign CourtTry not to kill people over the course of the scenario. You can talk to most people once they've surrendered.
And then he becomes conscious and tries to fight again since he fights to the death.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a few questions about the exchange card.
Resolve a combat encounter nonviolently through bribery, diplomacy, trickery, or a similar tactic.
Does this mean that if someone else in the group makes a diplomacy check and we avoid conflict, do I get to mark it? Normally it's things the character does but technically I avoided conflict if my group talked the bad guy off of attacking us. If I am wrong, no big deal, was just looking for some clarification.
Create a new trade route, either by mapping a legitimate path or opening doors to a smuggling enterprise. Doing so requires a successful Intimidate, Knowledge (geography), or Survival check with a DC equal to 15 + your character level.
What exactly does this entail? I understand the check part but in game what situation is it that I would be "mapping a path" or "opening doors to a smuggling enterprise"? I guess I would like an example for each of the skills because I don't really understand what it's asking me to do. Thank you for anyone who can clear this up for me!
|
|
Since the NPC was fanatical/scared/crazy enough to be willing to fight to the death, it really seems a little odd that the check is so low.And then he becomes conscious and tries to fight again since he fights to the death.Don't be dumb, being bound and gagged definitely counts as invalidating tactics.
It is left up to the GM how suitable an NPC is for faction card fulfillment.
|
|
And then he becomes conscious and tries to fight again since he fights to the death.Don't be dumb, being bound and gagged definitely counts as invalidating tactics.
I'm not sure of that, being alive seems to make trying to fight to the death still valid, sure it will probably be largely ineffective but that doesn't seem like the situation to chat with them.
Is there something indicating that they'd stop trying to fight to the death if bound and gagged? That they'd surrender if defeated and not killed? A statement in a guide, or forum post or something? I'd welcome something stating that defeated enemies no longer fight to the death when awoken.|
|
Is there something I'm missing?You tell me.
I don't see how that applies to fighting to the death. I don't see a situation where fighting to the death wouldn't be the correct choice for one that fights to the death. Like their goal is death, doing stuff that makes them more likely to be killed is what they should be doing, not stuff that preserves their life.
Which is what the potion example showed, that their goal is to be alive, but the tactic to achieve that would not further that goal and thus their tactic has been invalidated, it doesn't do what it was supposed to do.So sure, they might be forced to just sit and try to escape the rope and then US you to death if they escape, but I don't see how that changes their goal of fighting to the death and makes them suddenly surrender or cooperate.
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What do you mean? We've been told not to alter scenarios nor their tactics until invalidated. Being alive seems to mean that fighting to the death is still a valid plan. Is there something I'm missing?Do we really need that level of granularity?
If you read the new Season 9 guide, there's a great section about GM fiating and altering the scenario for unforeseen circumstances. I suggest everyone talking about "rigid adherence to Society's rules" give it a read.
PFS is a LOT more flexible in what you, as the GM, can allow then you think.
Gencon.
If that's the case, if I am in a play by post that started yesterday and it's clearly not going to end before Gencon. If I succeed at one of the goals during this adventure, will I get to mark it down on the sheet or will it need to wait till next one?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Add me to the list of people that are annoyed that The Powers That Be are making participation in the card game a condition for success. I was already disappointed when I heard at PaizoCon that certain faction plotlines could only be found out through the card game, and now making a condition on our RPG characters for the player's activity outside the RPG just really feels like the card game is getting shoved down our throats. No thank you.
|
|
What do you mean? We've been told not to alter scenarios nor their tactics until invalidated. Being alive seems to mean that fighting to the death is still a valid plan. Is there something I'm missing?Do we really need that level of granularity?
If you read the new Season 9 guide, there's a great section about GM fiating and altering the scenario for unforeseen circumstances. I suggest everyone talking about "rigid adherence to Society's rules" give it a read.
PFS is a LOT more flexible in what you, as the GM, can allow then you think.
but how do you invalidate fighting to the death? I don't see anything the PC's can do that would cause that aspect of an enemy to be invalidated.
|
|
but how do you invalidate fighting to the death? I don't see anything the PC's can do that would cause that aspect of an enemy to be invalidated.
Easily. If an npc is rendered unconscious, then brought back around, I could see a difficult Diplomacy or Bluff check possibly doing the trick, depending on how the Pc's approach it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
but how do you invalidate fighting to the death? I don't see anything the PC's can do that would cause that aspect of an enemy to be invalidated.What do you mean? We've been told not to alter scenarios nor their tactics until invalidated. Being alive seems to mean that fighting to the death is still a valid plan. Is there something I'm missing?Do we really need that level of granularity?
If you read the new Season 9 guide, there's a great section about GM fiating and altering the scenario for unforeseen circumstances. I suggest everyone talking about "rigid adherence to Society's rules" give it a read.
PFS is a LOT more flexible in what you, as the GM, can allow then you think.
If the character is rendered unable to fight, that would seem to invalidate the tactics demanding that they fight.
This may require a little more preparation on the PCs' part than "Oh no! Aspis Bob fell over! Let's heal him up--he'll probably like us for sure!"
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From my reading of the convince them to abandon goal, it shouldn't invalidate anything in the scenario. You are not convincing them to help you. You are convincing them to abandon their allegiance to whoever they serve. That doesn't mean they are going to give you any helpful information, or that if you untie them they aren't going to keep trying to kill you if they have the chance. It just means that you are convincing them that continuing to follow whoever they have been following is a bad idea. "Look at us. We're about to go downstairs, and when we do, your evil wizard overlord isn't going to be around anymore. Do you really want to die for someone who isn't going to be alive ten minutes from now?" Make the check, they leave the dungeon weaponless and jobless and maybe rethink their life choices. The alternative is the PCs murderhobo them or keep them unconscious. Either way, they aren't providing any information that changes the scenario in any meaningful way, and they aren't suddenly helpful.
|
Venture-Captain, Netherlands
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is often a lot more nuance in 'fights to the death'. Its often even spelled out in the tactics why they fight to the death. And that reason also affects what they would do when tied up.
"Zealot X fights to the death, because he believes his cause is worth dying for."
Willing to die for your cause, and then finding out they captured you would make a smart person go along with their capturers. You cant further your cause when you're death. Maybe he'll bluff a bit and hopes for release.
"Noble defector fights to the death, unable to live with the consequences of his actions."
Trying to anke-bite the barbarian doesnt work, and the noble knows it. He would be much better trying to provoke someone into killing him, or quietly trying to escape.
"The rabies infected racoon fights to the death, driven beyond all reason by the disease."
Ok, yeah, that one is going to spit and scream and try to ankle bite the barbarian.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
I like the goals in the abstract sense, but I want a bit more clarity on how they can be met. Just like we got some guidance on which NPCs can be recruited to factions.
Likewise for things like the Exchange goal to establish a trade route - does a scenario really have to call out trade routes, or do you need to find something that looks similar enough to it, or is it just something you do on a session where there's no other goal in sight?
The one-liner goals are just a bit too vague for me to infer how they're supposed to work.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland—Hagerstown
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also do not like the success condition of playing the ACG. If you do not GM, it is pretty much requiring you to play the ACG if you wish to complete the 7 goals on the card. And unfortunately I do not have enough people wanting to play the game.
IMO, starting to feel like Pay to Play game, with these goals. Especially if the player wants to fill the card out completely.
|
|
I also do not like the success condition of playing the ACG. If you do not GM, it is pretty much requiring you to play the ACG if you wish to complete the 7 goals on the card. And unfortunately I do not have enough people wanting to play the game.
IMO, starting to feel like Pay to Play game, with these goals. Especially if the player wants to fill the card out completely.
You can spend a prestige point to complete the goal without having to play the ACG.