Wrath of the Righteous for Paladins

Game Master trawets71

Congratulations!

So rather than cluttering up the game thread with what we're going to try to sell, would anyone like any of the following items? They're the ones that I assume it makes the most sense to sell if we're not going to immediately use.

Flint and steel
Caltrops
2 Oil flasks
Masterwork Warhammer
Dagger
Light Crossbow
10 bolts
Masterwork Chain Shirt
Masterwork Chain Shirt
Glaive
Glaive
Spiked Gauntlet
Spiked Gauntlet

It sounded like Ian would use the masterwork warhammer if no one else wanted it, and that Ardriel would use one of the masterwork chain shirts. I would probably upgrade my chain shirt to masterwork as well if no one else would make use of it. I'm inclined to sell the rest now (as well as at least the chain shirt I was wearing before upgrading,) unless someone sees something they'd use.

I also saw that Leothar would purchase a masterwork buckler if one was available. I'm fine with that. Are there other immediate purchases anyone would like to make?

We're still doing the "purchasing from party loot" scheme we agreed upon, right? I don't need any of the items above, so I'm fine with selling or having people in the party "purchasing" from the party loot. From my side, I'm good with just the gold from the split as I need to save to buy a breastplate or, even better, a full plate or something of the sorts in the future. Maybe a stone plate matches a Stonelord better!

If Leothar can afford and they have a masterwork buckler for sale here, please be my guest to purchase it. I need the AoOs of my reach so I can't do the same - but he can definitely attack with his weapon two-handed (with a -1 to attacks and no shield bonus while attacking), end his turn with the weapon in a single hand (if the weapon can also be one-handed) and get the buckler shield bonus between his turns. I think it's a great idea.

sounds like a good plan Petsha,

If I had started with more money I would have purchased an alchemical hammer instead of a light mace. So if neither of the dwarves claim the MW hammer I would like it. Once there's enough money I will invest in an alchemical MW hammer as a secondary weapon or could I pay to have this one 'alchemicalized'?.

should we go ahead and spread out the other CLW potions to those who don't have any?

If Leothar can afford and they have a masterwork buckler for sale here, please be my guest to purchase it. I need the AoOs of my reach so I can't do the same - but he can definitely attack with his weapon two-handed (with a -1 to attacks and no shield bonus while attacking), end his turn with the weapon in a single hand (if the weapon can also be one-handed) and get the buckler shield bonus between his turns. I think it's a great idea.

I am not sure how much shares come to from selling the stuff. If not, a plain buckler would do.

But if I were to attack with the buckler arm (including two-handing a weapon), the AC bonus would be lost until my next turn. That's okay. It gives options. Need damage and can afford a -1 to hit? Two-hand the axe. Need AC? One-hand the axe and use the buckler.

@Ian: I'd just use the MW hammer as a backup weapon and I don't think it's fair if you need it as your main weapon.

@Leothar: if you're using an one-handed weapon, you can let the grip on the buckler arm at the end of your turn and still have the AC between the turns. The only difference is that you'd do your AoOs using the weapon as one-handed instead. When using an one-handed weapon, the only reason you'd lose your AC between the turns is if you want to take your AoOs using the weapon with two hands. Grabbing a weapon with two hands or letting go one of the hands are both free actions.

Of course, during your own turn as you attack (if using the weapon with two hands), if for whatever reason you provoke an AoO or get attacked (like parry and riposte, something like that) then you'd not have the buckler AC either.

Notice that I don't have this option: my reach weapon is two-handed and can't be used in a single hand, so I can't do the maneuver described above. I mean, I could, but then I would only be able to do AoOs using my other weapon (the dwarven helmet) which is only 5-feet reach (I want to be able to take AoOs with 5 and 10-feet).

@Ian: I'd just use the MW hammer as a backup weapon and I don't think it's fair if you need it as your main weapon.

His main weapon will always be the long sword. Not that he won't use the hammer for a bit till he gets a MW longsword. But he will always carry a backup weapon that does bludgeoning damage.

I just don't like selling stuff we can use at half the price.

DM Trawets what would be the process of getting this hammer covered with 'alchemical silver'?

As I said, I'll take a masterwork chain shirt. I don't think I'd need anything else from that list.

The "purchasing from party loot" scheme means I pay the sell price out of my share, right? 125 GP for the chain shirt?

As I said, I'll take a masterwork chain shirt. I don't think I'd need anything else from that list.

The "purchasing from party loot" scheme means I pay the sell price out of my share, right? 125 GP for the chain shirt?

That's correct, Ardriel (it's actually more of 5/12 of the price instead of 1/2, since you "retain" your 1/6 of the share). Just act as if we sold it, and you were able to buy it for half price. Same goes for the hammer, Ian.

About the whole idea: the thing is that holding up to certain items just because they're marginally better than others (while we could sell) means delaying upgrades for the rest of the party. Some people have a tendency to want to keep every little bit and cranny while selling it could mean the other characters on the party get a little more gold share to be able to purchase the items they're targeting. The "purchasing from party loot" thing stimulates a fairer division of wealth. For instance, each little gold coin that is gained will help me save for a better armor for me.

So if the split doesn't cover enough for the cost of the item can we go into the negative for a bit? Are we doing the same thing with the potions and wands?

@Leothar: if you're using an one-handed weapon, you can let the grip on the buckler arm at the end of your turn and still have the AC between the turns. The only difference is that you'd do your AoOs using the weapon as one-handed instead. When using an one-handed weapon, the only reason you'd lose your AC between the turns is if you want to take your AoOs using the weapon with two hands. Grabbing a weapon with two hands or letting go one of the hands are both free actions.

No, you do not keep the AC between turns. It explicitly says the following:

This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an offhand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s Armor Class bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s Armor Class bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

So helping wield a two-handed weapon counts as using a weapon in your off hand.

I am fine with that.

DM Trawets what would be the process of getting this hammer covered with 'alchemical silver'?

Pay the difference in price. You can't do this with most special materials but since this is added onto a completed weapon you can. You will need an alchemist to do this though.

Yeah, I was aware of the first part. The second part ("until your next turn") is the one I was missing, but it makes sense. I stand corrected. It's still a good option for you if you can afford the -1 to attacks just to be able to switch between more damage or more defense, especially as a full BAB class.

Ian Passeri wrote:

DM Trawets what would be the process of getting this hammer covered with 'alchemical silver'?

Pay the difference in price. You can't do this with most special materials but since this is added onto a completed weapon you can. You will need an alchemist to do this though.

thanks

So if the split doesn't cover enough for the cost of the item can we go into the negative for a bit?

Yes, you basically just "owe" the gold to your companions (as if you had borrowed).

For example:

We are a party of six.

Let's say we got 360 gold selling items in general.

Let's say that, beyond this 360 gold, there was also an item costing (full price) 240 gold that you ("PLAYER 1") wanted to keep. If sold, we'd get an extra 120 gold.

If we had sold both items, we'd get a total of 360 + 120 = 480 gold, meaning 480 / 6 = 80 gold split for each member.

However, with only the first 360 gold, when we split each person got 360 / 6 = 60 gold. Including you that kept the item.

Now, you have to give each one of the other 5 members of the party the extra 20 gold to complete their share. With your 60 gold, each of these 5 guys will get 12 gold (60 / 5). If you don't have the other 40 gold, basically it means you owe each of your companions 8 gold until you get enough to "pay".

• PLAYER 1: No gold, 1 item worth 240 gold, I owe 40 gold to the other members of the party
  
• PLAYER 2: 72 gold (PLAYER 1 owes me 8 gold)
  
• PLAYER 3: 72 gold (PLAYER 1 owes me 8 gold)
  
• PLAYER 4: 72 gold (PLAYER 1 owes me 8 gold)
  
• PLAYER 5: 72 gold (PLAYER 1 owes me 8 gold)
  
• PLAYER 6: 72 gold (PLAYER 1 owes me 8 gold)
  

To make it simpler, just assume for PLAYER 1 that once he gets some gold, he will add 48 gold for the party to split.

Are we doing the same thing with the potions and wands?

The best answer is "it depends". For many cases, these consumables should be just ignored. But there are exceptions: if three players want to keep that "necklace of fireballs" or that "wand of invisibility", then these are items the holder should "pay to the party loot". Now, if we have a wand of restoration for example that we want the healer to keep and be using on the other party members, it doesn't make sense to charge for it. Same goes for like splitting potions of cure around to the people taking the most damage and whatnot.

The same goes for legendary items and items without price. While we can "guess-timate" their cost to balance the loot throughout the party, in many scenarios we might end up ignoring them.

Pay the difference in price. You can't do this with most special materials but since this is added onto a completed weapon you can. You will need an alchemist to do this though.

I like this ruling.

Right, so I've updated the loot sheet with a bit of new information.

I added the potions we got from Chief Sull (distributing 1 potion of healing to each party member, and putting the 3 potions of lesser restoration on Petsha for now, though if anyone else wants to carry them they're more than welcome to.)

I've added a column in the Item section to indicate who is holding the item. That's separate from who's using the items so that the scroll of remove fear or the potions we've found now aren't counting towards the shares of the person holding them, but we still know where everything is. I split items up as seemed to make some sense to me (so, for example, Fley has the potion of invisibility,) but we can absolutely find other places for them.

I assumed that Ardriel and Petsha would sell their old chain shirts when they replaced them with the masterwork ones. For items we find in the future, it'll be easy enough to change the status from whoever was using them to sold, but for starting gear (which doesn't show up on items,) I simply added the items to the crafted/purchased column with a negative cost (so that the money is going back to the pool of money we have to spend.) This should also handle how we're tracking items that we purchase and then sell back in the future if we want to do it that way.

Right now I'm assuming that consumable items should not count against a character's share of the treasure. They're counting to our total value as we could sell them if we needed to, but once they're used that value will go away. When we purchase or craft things like that in the future I assume that they'll come out of the group share that we've created, but we can discuss that further if people like.

As far as purchasing items from the group shares, right now the spreadsheet isn't tracking that exactly. Instead it tracks how much value each person has from the treasure we've found, or what's been purchased otherwise. There's a bonus for using items that we find or craft built in, in that they contribute half of their value the character's share. There's also a tab of the currently available gold that doesn't assume that we've split it up among the party.

By my thinking, for example, if at some point we had enough for Leothar to purchase an appropriate suit of armor he should go ahead an purchase that without needing to wait until he's personally saved enough for the share. As long as we're keeping the track of the value each person has from the general treasure and we work together to keep the party in general well equipped. If there's a dispute about spending the money, then the obvious default tie-breaker would be that the character who has less value so far would make that decision, though I hope we can avoid needing that to be a huge issue and mostly just play nice and take turns with the cool loot. Perhaps I'm being overly idealistic.

We should split the potions of lesser restoration between two people, just in case, since we have 4 in total.

Before we sell, I need to check items for magic. The knotted gold ring, if not magical, can probably be sold, unless it has religious significance for Torag.

...Perhaps I'm being overly idealistic.

Hopefully not, we are paladins, overly idealistic should be in the job description...

Splitting the potions of restoration sounds good to me. Anyone want to carry the other two?

Do you want to go ahead and check everything for magic now? Or would you rather wait till we end the day? I sort of assume we've still got time left today to continue on, but maybe we're camping here for the night?

Since we’re at a point we can, I can check once we finish with Chief Sull.

By my math it is around noon the day after the disaster. You are more than welcome to stay here for the night or you can continue on after selling off items.

Here are the magical items available for purchase in town, not that I think it matters: +1 arrows (8), +1 buckler, ring of protection +1,
earth elemental gem. There is spellcasting available but only up to 2nd level.

This is the end of part one of book one. You will level somewhere in part 2. I have increased the number of enemies in a couple of encounters to make up for your numbers. Any thoughts or concerns are welcome at this point. If you don't want to make them public you can PM me.

@DM Trawets, I'd say that you should probably get rid of the dice we've been using, but then we'd get rid of the one enemies have as well. They've been at least as unlucky, so I should probably be happy with that. I'm having a blast so far!

@everyone, would anyone use the +1 morningstar at this point? It'd be wasted on me as I'm all about the bow. Eventually having something like that as a backup will make sense, but would the enchantment help anyone with their everyday attacks now?

As far as moving or resting goes, I'm inclined to keep pushing on today. We don't know if there's a timer of any sort for things that happen and we're not low on resources or hp or anything at this point. We can rest here if people want to, but I don't see the need.

The ring and statuette will bring you:
62.5 gp for ring
37.5 gp for statuette

I'm good with continuing with out resting, but let's hold on to the morningstar till we get our of town, seems rude to sell a gift in front of the guy.

@Ian, I agree completely on the morningstar. It would be rude to sell it, and there's also the fact that it might be needed or useful.

GM, I thought jewelry and artwork like statuettes sold for full price?

I also agree we should keep the Morningstar. Ian, you could probably use it as your backup weapon in place of the warhammer.

I guess Leothar could take the warhammer for now. Because it is MW, it is effectively +1 to hit for -1 damage (compared to his waraxe).

It is the favored weapon of Torag, and there are a few benefits if he were to take Deific Obedience or Blessed Hammer. Leothar being intended to be a heavy hitter, I went with the higher-damage option, though in time the base weapon damage becomes almost irrelevant.

Leothar, I absolutely agree you should use the hammer and the fact it’s masterwork means you can enchant it later. Like you said, the damage impact is too low when compared with the other advantages (including flavor).

I’m fine with keeping the Morningstar now and selling later.

Nope, sorry guys, not giving up the hammer, you had your chance to claim it and no one wanted it. It fit's in my long term plan for gear. I will take that fancy 'Hammer of Torag' and coat it with alchemical silver, make it shine.

Someone else can use the +1 morningstar

Fair enough. I have no long term plan for gear.

Might get myself a nice hammer later, or just make use of whatever the AP drops.

So perhaps having Fley wield the morningstar temporarily makes sense. He's often in the front making attacks and it would help with hitting and damage when he's not using aid another. Clearly it wouldn't be the long term solution, and maybe we turn around and sell it as soon as we're up on the surface again, but it'd be making use of it in a productive way for now.

*edit* Except that I see he's already using weapon finesse, so it would actually decrease attack rolls by 1 (though it would increase damage somewhat significantly on non-crits, and the expected value for kukri crit damage for Fley currently (4) would be slightly less than the expected value for non-crit hits with the morningstar (4.5).

Fley is Small-sized. I think the Morningstar is medium-sized.

I could just use it, temporarily. I don’t have any feats to make me more inclined to ranged combat than melee right now, so I can technically switch hit.

That works for me as well for the morningstar.

@Leothar, were you looking for a basic buckler, or masterwork at this point?

Is anyone else going to make use of the merchant before we move on?

no purchases here, but we don't have enough money to purchase the +1 buckler for Leothar right?

Not unless we sold either the morningstar (which would cover all but 1 gp of the cost of the +1 buckler) a lot of potions and scrolls. Given how light we are on other healing I'm inclined not to sell the potions, but I don't have particularly strong opinions.

I'll just hold off on that purchase, now that I know they have a +1 version available.

I imagine we might report back here after dealing with the traitors and maybe will have more coin at that time.

I wouldn't really be using it until level 2 anyway (when I get Lay on Hands).

Unless you guys want to I'm not going to RP the buying and selling. Go ahead and double the numbers on the ring and statuette. I just want to make it clear that who ever accepted the +1 morningstar promised to kill at least one traitor with it.

To head off any potential issues I'm going to let you know that executing a prisoner is an evil act. You took him prisoner he's your problem now. I've no problem with letting unconscious characters bleed out and die.

I am of the opinion that when Torag's code referes to "my people's enemy" it is referencing orcs, goblinoids and giants.

I don't think you are too far off of a paladin of Sarenrae either. Redemption is a big part of her creed, but those that won't be redeemed are to be redeemed by the sword. I played a paladin of Sarenrae in this AP as well as a cleric and they almost always ask for the enemy to repent of their evil ways and surrender, they never seem to do so.

I'm not trying to stop your discussion in gameplay. As GM, I am the rest of the world and paladins I feel would know what their god expects of them. There is room for small differences in interpretation of the code. But the ultimate authority in that in this case is Torag.

There are some Sarenrites I've played with who want to stabilize enemies who refused to surrender, leave them alive, and just hope they find redemption on their own - when in fact redemption is a difficult process that pretty much needs a very dedicated sponsor. And a spared evildoer is much more likely to re-offend than to spontaneously reform.

So compared to them, I meant that Leothar's view was closer to Donnen's than to a Sarenrite view. But within the faith of Sarenrae there is particularly wide variation, like the Cult of the Dawnflower.

While Sarenrae's followers have a wide variation in their interpretation of her beliefs, I think stabilizing those who refused to surrender and leaving them on their own would be misapplying her wish for redemption. Parts of this AP specifically talk about redemption and lay out a process for it, if I remember correctly. It is made easier by having a sponsor but still a difficult process.

Donnen doesn't have the intention to execute the prisoner. His intentions are to clearly allow him to live if he cooperates. He doesn't see any issues on this kind of agreement. He isn't being merciful or merciless, just practical.

The way I understand Torag's code, "my people's enemies" does refer to the ancestral enemies of Dwarves - but it refers to anyone threatening the Dwarves nowadays as well. A demonic cult trying to end the world? They for sure are "my people's enemies". An evil wizard who wants to take control of a Sky Citadel? Same. Orc, goblin, giant, human, dwarf, elf, whatever.

In a more intimate feeling, Donnen is protective of his posse. It's not that he has a different "reading" of the code, just something personal about his relationship with allies. He is, after all, the Guardian of the party...

Paladins of Torag are still very much lawful good. We won't see him going around doing coup-de-grace on the enemies who can't fight back, while at the same time he won't bother to leave them behind to bleed to death. If he feels one of them can be useful alive, he will for sure keep the enemy alive and negotiate accordingly.

If an enemy puts his weapons down and surrenders or asks for mercy, I don't see Donnen killing him - but he might take him to local authorities and let them deal with it.

To head off any potential issues I'm going to let you know that executing a prisoner is an evil act. You took him prisoner he's your problem now. I've no problem with letting unconscious characters bleed out and die.

Guess it's a good idea that Ian didn't recommend someone execute the prisoner with the Morningstar, thus killing two birds with one stone :)

Once Donnen and Leothar are doing 3d10+150 with Mythic Power Attack Vital Strikes, stabilizing enemies who go negative is a bit less of a pressing issue...

Once Donnen and Leothar are doing 3d10+150 with Mythic Power Attack Vital Strikes, stabilizing enemies who go negative is a bit less of a pressing issue...

That is too true and not much of an exaggeration if one at all and the reason I want to keep this as core as possible. Mythic gets stupid crazy. Some of the bodies you've left are corpses and some are negative. I'm not worried about which is which but I will say there is on roach that's not dead yet. It's the one that didn't fight anymore when it went negative.

DM Trawets, on the map, I thought I had moved Ian up beside Leothar, but that's not where he is currently. Do you mind if Ian starts combat beside Leothar or do you want me to start from his present location.

Someone mentioned getting in your standard order so I moved everybody. Being grouped around a door makes more sense than a line so I was wondering about standard order. Maybe we should come up with something for a door where you can gather around if you want. Feel free to start where you wanted. That goes for everybody.

cool,

For entering a door I like the two dwarves stacked up, not sure what's best to do after that.

Stack the dwarves, and maybe the rest of us off to the side. It means we everyone who isn’t a dwarf loses immediate LOS, but it also protects us from a group color spray or burning hands hit if we either lose initiative or if they’re ready for us.

Could someone remind me how we were doing hit points? Were we rolling taking 1/2 HD + 1, max, etc?

I don't think I said. I use 1/2 +1 so 6 for you guys.