Feel free to start posting mechanics questions, back and forth on character creation, or any other helpful tips or comments here. Also, please feel free to offer critique on my GM performance during the scenario - I have a thick skin, and want to improve, so anything is fair game: mechanics, pace, flavor, grammar, etc.
Thanks for joining!
|
PFS: 40402-4
no day job
Initiative: +2
Perception: +10
I plan on multi-classing every other level with barbarian, but trapfinding skills will be maxed out. I included a progression plan in my profile. Please note that I have combat reflexes with longspear. At 2nd level, primary weapon will be a glaive.
|
Taidus Raine here, "switch-hitting" monk. I can have fun with my shuriken or my fists.
My typical method of things, drink potion of mage armor, bump AC values then wade into melee or throw a shuriken if I cannot.
Leveling plan is more than likely stay monk until I cap at 12, I may or may not dip into a PrC. With Core, nothing really fits well with monk in my opinion, lest someone can sway me otherwise. The only thing that even remotely may work with monk is shadowdancer PrC.
PFS # 63386-16
Init +2
Perception +6
A paladin, a thief and a monk walk into a bar...
|
|
It's too bad the duelist PrC isn't more monk friendly. A monk should have the parry option in its base class. It's funny to imagine a monk disarming someone's dagger or light piercing weapon then poking holes into its owner with it. A human bane siangham could get the job done with an 8th level monk and 2 level Duelist, but I think a strength based monk that flurries and power attack with improved crit at 10th is more bang for your buck.
|
So I was using an empty character slot that had already been registered as a 'regular' PFS character, hoping that it would switch to Core when this game got reported but I've been told that that won't work so I had to shift Lod to a new number and reregister him as a Core character.
Here's his new number:
#55162-30
Could you please remove "Unnamed Flaxseed #2 - PFSOG" from the campaign? Go to the Campaign Info tab and press the "Edit This Campaign" button, then under characters uncheck the box next to that name and it will remove that alias from the game.
Thanks!
|
|
So I was using an empty character slot that had already been registered as a 'regular' PFS character, hoping that it would switch to Core when this game got reported but I've been told that that won't work so I had to shift Lod to a new number and reregister him as a Core character.
Thank you very much for stating this. I did the same with Zakon and replacing him with Xakon. Please remove Zakon, #40402-4 from the campaign.
Xakon's PFS# 40402-9
OK - that is taken care of. I also saw an NPC check - is that for me to add additional NPC aliases or something?
|
|
No, you don't need to worry about that. You could create different aliases for your NPCs (I tried it out when I first starting GMing here) but it's usually more trouble than its worth and I've never seen anyone else do that before. It also gets confusing then who is the GM and who is a PC. Easier to just post under your GM alias all the time.
Sorry - I meant to start yesterday, but the say just got away from me... will be posting the intro shortly.
Need a few small things, but no real hurry:
Taidus - Faction and day job?
Lōd - Faction?
Xakon- Faction and day job?
Otherwise, I think I am good. Posting intro now.
Droghedor (future Eldritch Knight)
PFS #3601-21
Grand Lodge
No day job
I forgot the most important detail! Do you have character details created yet?
|
|
I forgot the most important detail! Do you have character details created yet?
Droghedor (future Eldritch Knight)
PFS #3601-21
Grand Lodge
No day job
Of course! :-D
Seriously: no, but I'll do it tonight and update the PC on the site.
OK, experienced GMs - question for you.
There are a number of extra details available for specific skill check DCs throughout this (and all, I assume) adventure. Some of these, like Knowledge, seem passive - meaning I think I should either roll for you (or like I did for Taidus, auto-take 10) to see whether you know it or not. Others seem like they should at least require a player to decide on a course of action (such as Perception for find traps, Diplomacy to gather information, or Survival to track something). Perception to notice something also seems passive - otherwise the player is always guessing when to look for clues, right?
How do you generally handle these? Or is it more of a case by case judgement call?
In scenarios with several checks like that, I sometimes have players roll out Perception checks (also Sense Motive) in advance and have them on the initiative cards I use for reference. You can always do the same in PbP by asking for them and randomly determining which roll to use when the time comes.
Knowledge checks, in my book, should always be rolled by the player, but there's nothing wrong with saying "roll a Kn (nature) if you have it" and/or putting that info in a spoiler tag, like this:
Monkeys are highly social creatures. They spend the majority of their day searching for food.
Most of the time, your players are fine waiting for someone to succeed at the Kn check and let the party know what's in the spoiler. And if they're not, you'll figure it out pretty quickly when they act on player knowledge instead of PC knowledge...and you may not wanna play with those metagamers anymore, you know? :-)
For PCs with trapfinding , I typically offer to have the PC use his/her Take 10 score so that it doesn't slow the game down. It's up to them, of course, if they choose to do so, but I find most players grateful for the opportunity to use something in which they've invested "passively" like that.
As is usually the case, YMMV — do what works best for you. Cast about a bit and try different things if you're not happy with something. This is a great guinea pig table! :-)
|
|
Yes, for Knowledge and similar checks I prefer to use the spoiler system. That way the players know that the check is available to them as an option. Otherwise they might never think to roll it.
Traps are a bit trickier over PbP. It's too slow to say There's a door and then wait a day for one of the players to respond I check it for traps. You can either use the take 10 values or just roll Perception for the trap expert of the group. Or you could even put a Perception spoiler when you post the description of the room/hallway/door/etc. I use all of the above depending on the situation.
Some of my regular players have developed what they call SDOP (Standard Door Opening Procedure). At the beginning of the game they tell me when we come to a door, so-and-so will take 10 (or 20) checking for traps and if it is safe, so-and-so will lead the way in. Then all they have to do is say We use SDOP to move to the next room or even if they don't say anything, I know how to proceed without waiting for their input.
In fact, in my Shattered Star group the archaeologist has trap spotter and a high Perception so he auto-succeeds at noticing all traps. His Disable is high enough to disable most traps as well. If he can take 10 and succeed, I usually don't even wait for him. I just post Bert notices a pressure plate in the floor and easily wedges it in place.
I am learning a lot on this one - everyone has been very helpful! I think it is going fairly smooth with only a few little bumps so far. Pace ok?
Question for how much info to give players: If a creature has Hardness (as you can guess a robot does), should I give indications as to how much? Or just try to generically describe it? Or do I indicate at all?
|
|
One of the most difficult aspects of Pathfinder is tracking ongoing conditions. For example, Robot is grappled by tanglefoot bag, Taidus and Xakon is flanking and Taidus is staggered. Mechanically it means:
- Robot has a –2 penalty on attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity
- Xakon has +2 attack bonus
- Taidus has +2 attack bonus, but can only take a standard or move action for 1 round
One suggestion is to post it at the bottom of every combat like this:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ongoing effects: Staggered @Taidus (1 rd); Flanking @Xakon @Taidus; Grappled, tanglefoot @Robot
|
|
I also meant to make a note of this earlier: regarding initiative, Korvan would have automatically gone ahead of Taidus and the Robot because his initiative modifier is higher. The tie-break is only needed when the roll and init mod are both the same.
Ex:
Valeros scores (8) + 2 = 10
Merisiel scores (11) + 4 = 15
Kyra scores (14) + 1 = 15
Ezren scores (14) + 1 = 15
The init order would be:
Merisiel
Kyra/Ezren -- tie-break needed
Valeros
So, as a new GM, and finding myself learning a lot more details in the rules than I did as a player! But that begs a few questions.
As I read Entangle, I would assume it required vegetation to exist rather than growing it from nowhere, but for sake of expediency, we are going to play it as Caerwynn described. Also, I think this encounter seems a little dangerous for all 1st level anyway, so I figured you could use the advantage. But what are your thoughts?
Also, I was a little confused because Reflex save keeps you from becoming Entangled, yet the terrain is still difficult. Since both effects hamper your movement to 1/2, I am not sure I see the difference. In this case, I decided the one that failed both reflex and escape check simply didn't move, and the ones that passed one got half move (and wasted a move action to escape). So if one had success with the reflect save, they would have gotten 1/2 move and attack (if close enough).
Another thing that I see no applicable rule for is damage to the entangling vines. Since these skeletons are burning plasma, it would seem logical that the vines might simply burn away. But as I saw no mechanism for that, I just ignored the idea.
Thanks, as always, for your advice and input!
|
|
I've always seen it played that you can cast it anywhere, but that doesn't mean a whole lot. Since there isn't anything in the text that says it fails in an area without natural grass, I've played it as creatures who fail a save in an area with natural plants are tethered (as per the entangled condition description) rather than simply entangled. Interested to hear others' thoughts as well.
On to your other questions. Difficult terrain is separate from the half speed from a failed save--the half speed reduces base speed by half, and the difficult terrain means that each square counts as 10ft of movement rather than 10 (and 15ft for diagonals). So a creature with a base speed of 30ft that failed the save would only be able to move one square with a single move, or three squares with a double move (or two if taking a diagonal).
The "entangled" condition that the spell bestows on a failed save is more than just the reduction in movement--it also applies a -2 penalty to all attack rolls and applies a -4 penalty to Dexterity (reducing Armor Class and reducing ranged attacks even further).
Finally, plasma damage plus entangle is an excellent question. The vines are magical, but obviously don't have plasma resistance... I don't think it would be RAW, but it would be RALF (Rules as Logically Follows). You're the GM, so your call!
|
|
A common way around the wording of the spell implying that there are supposed already be plants in the area is for the caster just to carry around a potted plant. Kinda cheesy, but hey, the spell wording isn't that clear to begin with.
And yes, entangled is a different condition that imposes lots o' penalties as Caerwynn notes.
As for the plasma burning away the vines: that's one of those reasonable things that's not going to be spelled out anywhere in any book but you as the GM have the authority to say these things have a plasma aura that burns through the vines and makes it easier for them to escape. Or you could rule that the vines are magical and resist the plasma damage. The players can disagree with you but ultimately it's your call and you have the ability to squash any uprisings with rebuttals of I'M THE GM! ;)
But seriously, those sorts of things come up all the time as a GM. As you do it more and more, you'll get more comfortable just making a snap decision that the plasma does or does not burn through the vines and 99% of the time the players won't even bat an eye. Or if they do point to some obscure passage showing you ruled it wrong, you still have two choices: rectify and fix the situation or (if it is going to slow the game down too much) just say sorry, now I know for next time but for now we're just going to keep playing with what I said earlier.
|
|
A common way around the wording of the spell implying that there are supposed already be plants in the area is for the caster just to carry around a potted plant. Kinda cheesy, but hey, the spell wording isn't that clear to begin with.
Or, in Caerwynn's case, pre-existing vines vomit forth from her hair... who knows when the last time she bathed was. :P
And I'll second what Lōd said. Being the GM means you have vague omnipotent powers. With great power comes great responsibility, but hey, you've got great power!
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
Thanks!
I am going to be in transit the next few days, so may not post as often as usual. But I will try to get to it at least once a day.
If you all wish to continue, I am game. They were having a sale a few weeks ago on scenarios, so I bought pretty much all of the one's I had already played at least once. So we have a few to choose from.
I think I recall someone wanting to do the Hall of the Flesh Eaters when we first started.
You all are so close to done, but it looks like a few people have basically dropped out (no posts in almost two weeks) and so our story has sort of been grinding to a halt. So if anyone wants to take leadership and start making calls for the whole party, I think that would be ok at this point.
I don't know where everyone is, but I am assuming spring break and Easter schedules are a big part of it.
Also, we talked about continuing in another adventure with the same group, but I am not sure if everyone is still committed to that plan still. Any thoughts?