Kingmaker (Inactive)

Game Master Dreaming Warforged

A couple of months ago, we were bouncing around the idea of taking this Kingmaker campaign on a mythical bend with the new ruleset. FYI, they just posted the mythic rules in the PRD on this site.

Thanks markofbane! I'll have a look.

Regarding the Battle of Tzatzlfjord: this battle was initially intended as a trial run for a simpler version of the larger scale battle rules that would appear later in the AP. Would you guys like me to run it that way? There are still parts that will be run like normal combat.

As long as all our efforts aren't reduced to 'you cast a crapload of spells, that gives you a +1 to the roll, which you then fail anyway.'

I remember that being an issue in previous streamlined mass combat rules. "I unleash a plan worthy of Sun Tzu with choke points and kill zones and traps and pincer strategies and blow all sorts of resources!" "You roll a 6. The bad guy, whose brilliant plan was 'zerg rush**,' and spent nothing, rolled a 17. You lose."

I'd prefer a GM adjudicated diceless narrative to one that hinges on random chance and reduces hours worth of preparation to a 5% bonus on a die roll.

(Or something purely statistical, like we did back in 1st edition in the Bloodstone wars, where the DM just calculated how well the giants would hit our army, how many soldiers they could kill a round (which was a huge problem for them, because the super giants could still only squish one peasant a round!), and how much damage, on average, each giant took from the few attacks that statistically would hit them, so that it became a contest of how much the giants would be whittled down each round, and if enough soldiers could survive to keep up the pressure before the giants squished so many of them that they no longer could inflict enough damage to kill them. But that's crazy amounts of work, when dealing with so many factors, such as the buffs and our hit chances varying because of invisibility and blah-blah-blah, and was only workable back then because stuff like Attacks of Opportunity and Reach didn't exist.)

.

**
Buffy - "We need a distraction."
Xander - "So what's the plan?"
Buffy - "I'm going to kill them all. That should distract them."
Xander - "Good plan."

I don't know anything about the mass combat rules that were presented in the modules, but I would be willing to give them a try. I agree with Set's comments, but I am optimistic that Paizo will have something better than what we've seen in the past.

That's a good point Set. The system for this battle has some randomness to it. Basically, depending on the strategies chosen for offence and defence, you get bonuses (for example, snipers on the roof, traps, etc, would work. Spells add bonuses if they are area of effect, according to their level.

Each teams rolls for attack and see if it's higher than the other team's defence score (like regular combat). If you hit, you gain Battle points. At the end of the battle, the one who has the most battle points wins, though the difference in battle points helps define what the cost was.

So it has some frustrating simplifications. It's not necessary for this battle. Let me know if you want to try it.

Ok, I haven't much. Let's try the rules then, and we can see if we like them as they'll take more place in the next volume.

Good thinking. That way we'll know before we get immersed in larger encounters using them. Are they someplace I can read them over?

Just to be clear:

Scratch the Bear's Endurance, Set. I'd rather Servayn use his spells for mass effect. It's just better.

@markofbane: There's THIS. I'd guess that's what DW is using.

Of course, it's possible there are some Mass Combat rules within the AP he could be using that may differ from the Ultimate Campaign.

For now I'm using the short version in volume 4, set only for that battle. It's expected the fight with the trolls will be a regular encounter, but it will impact the battle's results.

Please note that I'll be unable to reliably post until Tuesday.

I am waiting for a replacement laptop power cable. Please, bit me if you need to. I have laid out my planned actions.

The fireball will be saved for the second pair but if they're far apart then the third pair will get it. I'm hoping the holy damage will help to overcome DR for my archery too. Summons will be fire elementals.

If any of you wishes to use the new classes being playtested for a bit, as long as they maintain your character's feel, let me know. I'm open to discuss.

The main ones that intrigue me are the arcanist, the swashbuckler and the shaman, none of which vibe well with paladin. :)

Busy time of the year for me at work. There'll be issues with posting at times. Just a heads up.

Thanks! ;)

Through it all, roaring walls of fire, bursts of mystical embers blinding some while burbling black sludge brings others to the ground, and noisome oily tentacles erupt from the earth, while a dragon-like creature the size of a rhinoceros leaps about like an excitable kitten attacking milling ants, Servayn laughs like a madman, bringing chaos and fire in his wake.

LOL! Oh man that's just greatness. Absolute classic, man. :)

I agree. I enjoyed it a lot!

"I love the smell of bat guano in the morning..."

It's all you, dog. :)

The game has slowed down a lot. It's partly my fault, but I'm trying to give it some momentum back. Let me know if you have suggestions or comments.

Also, Book 4 can be a repeat of the other modules with a lot of exploration. I'm going to try not to have it bog the game down, and cut it to the most important encounters.

I must also say that there is a big problem with the challenge level of the module. You should be level 10 according to guidelines, but you already have an easy time with the encounters... I'm still struggling with that.

I'm not sure that 'too easy' is a big problem, since the last encounter killed one of the party and had others at single digits, and this one came real close to killing Kriger, and that's *with* a huge amount of preparation and a dozen buffs in advance (a golden situation pretty close to perfect and unlikely to ever be seen again).

As I understood the scenario going in, the trolls and bandits weren't supposed to threaten *us,* they will supposed to kill the villagers, and, since some villagers died despite our attempting to handle the bulk of it, we didn't exactly get an unvarnished 'win' in this encounter.

(A more heroic 'epic' win would have been if we could have ambushed the raiding party farther from the town, and taken them out before they even reached Tatzlford, but that didn't seem feasible, at the time, and at our current level.)

I think some of the slowdown may just be seasonal. And I think the challenge level is good, actually. As Set noted, we didn't come through unscathed in any case.

As can be seen when we first learned about the impending raid, I was all for trying to do the pre-emptive strike. Until Kalsgrim found out they were hours away, and not days.

Sometimes when an AP is a little more "sandboxy", it can take a little bit of back and forth for the PCs to decide on a course of action, and I thin we've seen that a time or two.

Good points, both. I'll keep this in mind.

Thanks. For example, right now I am debating: do we go back to Providence and beef up defenses, or do we push west and see if we can deal with the rogue baron quickly. Or something else entirely. If the others have an idea or preference, I'd love to know.

Push west and nip it in the bud.

That seems a better way to protect our lands from strife.

The game has slowed down a lot. It's partly my fault, but I'm trying to give it some momentum back. Let me know if you have suggestions or comments.

Also, Book 4 can be a repeat of the other modules with a lot of exploration. I'm going to try not to have it bog the game down, and cut it to the most important encounters.

I must also say that there is a big problem with the challenge level of the module. You should be level 10 according to guidelines, but you already have an easy time with the encounters... I'm still struggling with that.

As per this, I agree with both Set and markofbane. Don't know about the others but Kriger sure as heck hasn't found these encounters "easy" at all. :P

@Geraint: So I gather you got yourself a new computer? Or keyboard? Can't remember what it was that was giving you trouble initially. Looks like your back at it again so that's good! :)

Also: Is Kriger healed? He's down like 60 hp's.

On another note, while Enlarge is a great spell damage wise, it kills AC. That spell gives you the best/worst of both worlds at the same time. Excellent damage/get hit easier. It's a give and take type thing. I hate that 'cause I love big ol' nasty damage. But I probably should pass on it. I'd definitely keep using it for Ember, though. Being a summoned creature, death is merely an annoyance for him. :)

And I'll tell you why I thought Ember was a girl initially. I actually work with woman who goes by that name. Spelled exactly like that. And where I wrote, "...annoyance for him", I almost wrote her again. So it's possible I could screw up and call him a her. Hopefully it won't be IC to where he'll just cook me and eat me. :)

Thanks. For example, right now I am debating: do we go back to Providence and beef up defenses, or do we push west and see if we can deal with the rogue baron quickly. Or something else entirely. If the others have an idea or preference, I'd love to know.

That's a no-brainer. Kriger is all for dealing with this chump.

I'm all for pushing forward. We got punished for it last time, with Grigori, but screw it. This is how heroes work, proactively, not huddling back at home, afraid to step out and confront evil. If the AP punishes heroic behavior and rewards inertia (standing around and waiting for stuff to come to us), that's a problem with the AP, not with our choices.

PBPs already have some pacing issues, no need to exacerbate them by running home and standing around and waiting for the bad guys to take the initiative all the time.

Then we are on it! Pushing hard and to the west.

Merry Christmas Everyone!

A CotCT game I'm in is currently recruiting an extra player. Let me know if you post an application.

Merry Christmas, all!

Merry Christmas everyone!

Thanks for the notice on CotCT. I'm already in one here that has slowed down, but I am hoping will pick up after the new year.

Just a heads up: I'm really thinking hard about starting a Wrath of the Righteous PbP.

And I'm thinking really hard about what I would submit if you do...

I'm still working on the recruitment post, and thinking whether I can pull it off, so no promises.

Let me know if you have comments or suggestions.

I've already started playing in a WotR campaign on the site (with another GM from a game I am already in).

Happy New Year!

As per the Wrath game, I don't quite understand the Humble beginnings and Original Sin bit.

If I understand correctly it seems like it kinda "forces" you to go a certain way in creating your background. Which kind of forces you to build your pc "around" that instead of building it however you wish.

Now, the reason I mention this is because, if you look at the campaign traits, they are practically a pre-gen background. You already have to build your pc around a set background.

That is the one thing I've found a bit annoying with the campaign traits. It's basically saying,

Paizo: "Okay, pick any character here you want, and then you can choose between one of these backgrounds I've got here for you."

Player: "Wait a minute, can't I come up with my own reason as to why I got here?"

Paizo: "Um, well, I guess, but it really needs to be one of THESE backgrounds, or you just won't fit within this AP."

Not saying it's impossible to come up with a background that's tied to it, it just limits the player and their own ability to come up with his own vision of how their pc got there - and why. Your "tied" down in essence.

Now, again, I could be misunderstanding your take on Humble Beginnings and Original Sins, but, it strikes me a bit as being even more limiting. Not only do you have the campaign trait building your pc, but now you have more standards you must build your pc around.

Combined, it just strikes me as a pc being built with not near the personality it could contain if the player were to make it according to his own. A cardboard cut-out if you will.

Maybe it wouldn't be near as limiting if the campaign traits weren't so pre-gen like; I don't know.

But that's just my 2 cents, nothing more. Divide the change amongst yourselves. :)

As an aside: I've been wanting to play this AP. Because I've been wanting to roll with some Mythic Rules. I think they are so freaking awesome! I'm just having a hard time "fitting" a pc around Paizo's backgrounds. I have a hard enough time coming up with backgrounds by myself. And initially I was thinking it might be easier to have a pre-made background already. But I have found it's even more difficult. Because then you have to go back and fill in all the details about how it all happened. It's actually easier to come up with your own. Which is obviously saying a lot coming from me. :)

The developers have hinted that the mythic elements are plot-related and so your background trait creates connections which lead to mythic status.

They're a tool to bring story and character closer together, and this AP is an experiment to see if they can be a little more closely tied.

Good points Javell. I tended to see the campaign traits as episodes more than backgrounds, but I'll have another look.

As for the Humble Beginnings and Original Sins, I meant by this to have heroes coming out of the lowest ranks, in terms of expectations, and with a past that is not all shiny, but contains mistakes and guilt. In other words, normal people with dreams.

I'll see how I can rephrase to be more clear, and open while bringing the characters under a common theme.

As for the Humble Beginnings and Original Sins, I meant by this to have heroes coming out of the lowest ranks, in terms of expectations, and with a past that is not all shiny, but contains mistakes and guilt. In other words, normal people with dreams.

I'll see how I can rephrase to be more clear, and open while bringing the characters under a common theme.

See, I think you did it rather well right there. You can tell prospective players "I am looking for unexpected heroes that are coming out of the lowly ranks of the community surrounding the Worldwound. I am not looking for the shining paragon ready to take the fight to the hordes single-handedly, but the simpler folks, the unlikely heroes who may doubt they have a destiny of any measure."

Perhaps if you pose a series of questions for them to answer in their background?
-What sort of job did your character come to the Worldwound to hold, and what did they end up resorting to?
-Did your character have a shameful moment that makes them harbor self doubt or guilt?

I tend to find questions like that useful to get the tone of the campaign that the GM is looking for when crafting a background story.

I agree that for this AP (more than any other to this point), the traits are very railroady. For example, I am considering a wizard with the archmage path. Looking at the trait for that, Riftward Orphan, I cannot play an elf, or even an older gnome or dwarf, to qualify of the Breadth of Experience feat. The Worldwound and its wards are less than a century old, so it wouldn't make sense for someone so old to be the orphan child of someone who built or maintained the wardstones.

So, as it is, I am looking at submitting a human wizard. He was an orphan raised near the Worldwound and sought to become a wizard and sage, a leading expert on the struggle. Instead, he is a lowly scribe in a large hall of scribes, copying missives and orders to be sent by couriers to various units.

As per the Wrath game, I don't quite understand the Humble beginnings and Original Sin bit.

If I understand correctly it seems like it kinda "forces" you to go a certain way in creating your background. Which kind of forces you to build your pc "around" that instead of building it however you wish.

Now, the reason I mention this is because, if you look at the campaign traits, they are practically a pre-gen background. You already have to build your pc around a set background.

That is the one thing I've found a bit annoying with the campaign traits. It's basically saying,

Paizo: "Okay, pick any character here you want, and then you can choose between one of these backgrounds I've got here for you."

Player: "Wait a minute, can't I come up with my own reason as to why I got here?"

Paizo: "Um, well, I guess, but it really needs to be one of THESE backgrounds, or you just won't fit within this AP."

Not saying it's impossible to come up with a background that's tied to it, it just limits the player and their own ability to come up with his own vision of how their pc got there - and why. Your "tied" down in essence.

Now, again, I could be misunderstanding your take on Humble Beginnings and Original Sins, but, it strikes me a bit as being even more limiting. Not only do you have the campaign trait building your pc, but now you have more standards you must build your pc around.

Combined, it just strikes me as a pc being built with not near the personality it could contain if the player were to make it according to his own. A cardboard cut-out if you will.

Maybe it wouldn't be near as limiting if the campaign traits weren't so pre-gen like; I don't know.

But that's just my 2 cents, nothing more. Divide the change amongst yourselves. :)

As an aside: I've been wanting to play this AP. Because I've been wanting to roll with some Mythic Rules. I think they are so freaking awesome! I'm just having a hard time "fitting" a pc around Paizo's backgrounds. I have...

I'm thinking I could perhaps rewrite the traits to make them a little more vague... Since I'm the DM, I can probably adapt most of them...

When it comes to putting a skill point in a profession, I'd probably give 1 skill point for free -- for that reason. Skill points are hard to come by for some classes; especially at 1st level. It's tough to burn one on an skill that more than likely is not gonna come into play ever again.

I mean, someone who's a Profession(bartender) isn't gonna be making drinks in the middle of the Abyss like nobody's business is all I'm saying. ;)

I've changed that one already for something like: your skill points should reflect your occupation.

I love the image of Servayn calling back Ember just so he doesn't have to trudge through the swamp. :) Whereas Kalsgrim doesn't seemed bothered by the muck, even when it tries to lash to him and hinder him. I love that he can't fail his save against the entangle spell. My only regret is that he's not closer so he can stand inside the stinking cloud and rain death on them.

Javell DeLeon wrote:

As per the Wrath game, I don't quite understand the Humble beginnings and Original Sin bit.

If I understand correctly it seems like it kinda "forces" you to go a certain way in creating your background. Which kind of forces you to build your pc "around" that instead of building it however you wish.

Now, the reason I mention this is because, if you look at the campaign traits, they are practically a pre-gen background. You already have to build your pc around a set background.

That is the one thing I've found a bit annoying with the campaign traits. It's basically saying,

Paizo: "Okay, pick any character here you want, and then you can choose between one of these backgrounds I've got here for you."

Player: "Wait a minute, can't I come up with my own reason as to why I got here?"

Paizo: "Um, well, I guess, but it really needs to be one of THESE backgrounds, or you just won't fit within this AP."

Not saying it's impossible to come up with a background that's tied to it, it just limits the player and their own ability to come up with his own vision of how their pc got there - and why. Your "tied" down in essence.

Now, again, I could be misunderstanding your take on Humble Beginnings and Original Sins, but, it strikes me a bit as being even more limiting. Not only do you have the campaign trait building your pc, but now you have more standards you must build your pc around.

Combined, it just strikes me as a pc being built with not near the personality it could contain if the player were to make it according to his own. A cardboard cut-out if you will.

Maybe it wouldn't be near as limiting if the campaign traits weren't so pre-gen like; I don't know.

But that's just my 2 cents, nothing more. Divide the change amongst yourselves. :)

As an aside: I've been wanting to play this AP. Because I've been wanting to roll with some Mythic Rules. I think they are so freaking awesome! I'm just having a hard time "fitting" a pc

...

That may work.

So if I understand correctly, what you're saying is:

You can take any one of the above traits - no matter what mythic path you take - and you'll still be able to tie it within the story. Because I believe(correct me if I'm wrong) that each trait is tied into the story? There's like a specific individual story line - or something to that effect - for each campaign trait, correct?

Because, if so, that's a pretty good idea, I think. At least by doing it this way, it opens up the possibilities for folks to at least choose which trait they want to use, instead of their Mythic Path choosing it for them.

So, are you taking away the trait's actual boon? And when you say replace with a feat, is that what would replace that?

Yes, that's what I have in mind. The feat could be from my list that replaces the traits, or any feat. Not sure yet.