Gameday XI - PFS2 3-98 Expedition Into Pallid Peril - GM Thread (Inactive)

Game Master numbat1

Note the crit effect on grapple makes you restrained and “you can't use any actions with the attack or manipulate traits except to attempt to Escape or Force Open your bonds.” Swallow whole has the Attack trait, so it seems possible to prevent it with a crit grapple.

Just making sure I'm not lagging behind or rushing ahead too much: what's everyone's progress so far? My players completed one area and just started combat in a new area. After that, they'll have completed two areas in Act 1.

My players have been moving pretty slowly. Completed labyrinth, working on the Sealed Way.

I have finally gotten some of them to put in botting instructions for healing. No champions, so it takes a while in game time. Only one healer with assurance, so the other needs to roll and risk the crit failure.

I think they are better finding their stride and I hope things will start moving faster. Does appear that many of them don’t post over the weekend.

My group is about the same as Kwinten. Almost completing two areas seem to be the fast rate :)

We still have until Oct 5 to complete three areas, so plenty of time for everyone!

My players are on their last encounter of the first area. I'm hoping to move on to a second area in two or three days.

My players completed the Labyrinth, just finished the underwater combat. The rest of this area might go quicker although I expect an Aspis Incursion to spice up the next Hazard area!

We're just starting area 2 out of 3.

Mine is in the 2nd room of their first area. The eels gave them a solid challenge even though I forgot the piercing resistance. They'd probably still be fighting if I hadn't.

Mine are working on the Allies challenge before completing the Unsealed Way. This is their first area.

We should be moving on in the next day or two.

Mine just wrapped it up, one point shy of the Ally Success (with a split vote.)

Event 1 now posted, only a little late.

I also wanted to comment that I appreciate what a great group of GMs I have. Questions come up and discussion is had and I have very little need to add anything. Thank you.

Mine are working on the Allies challenge before completing the Unsealed Way. This is their first area.

We should be moving on in the next day or two.

That is exactly where mine was too. The high tier skeletons gave them some challenge with their 11 total resistances and immunities, overall mediocre rolls and some slower posters lead to it taking a while.

We're on our 3rd area and have fought the Aespis grunts. Part of it is they post fast, and they've also curb stomped all encounters (until this one) by good rolls and 1-2 being somewhat easy. The reefclaw fight looks like it might be tough, though.

I am about to post the announcement for Event 2.

Remember, events 2 & 3 as written in our PDFs swapped places. Please make sure to run Countermeasures not Infiltration.

If we still haven't started Event #1, we run that first and then Event #2 (not concurrently), correct?

We will be starting the last area (Unsealed Way) this morning.

My group has had an extremely easy time. I keep checking that I'm on the correct tier.

Mine are still working on the first area, Unsealed Way. They dealt with the skeleton combat in 3 rounds and the Aspis fight in under 2, but the social encounter plus **four** additional exits to explore has just bogged us down.

They only have to find one of the exits to complete the area.

Actually, the need to find one of each:

Reporting: Once the PCs have fully explored the Unsealed Way (including finding at least one of the elevators marked C4 as well the tunnel down in area C5), report an Unsealed Way success.

If we still haven't started Event #1, we run that first and then Event #2 (not concurrently), correct?

That's correct. Page 9, under Aspis Events, says this:

I find the timing a bit off here. I'm currently still in the first Aspis event, and we're already supposed to run the second one as well. I hope events 3 and 4 will be a bit more staggered, because this is pretty fast. Not sure if this feedback is helpful at all to the author or if the scenario's set in stone.

Similar to GM Doug, my players are tearing through the opponents. Though I guess that happens with level -1 and level 1 creatures. Especially considering there's only supposed to be like 2 combats a day.

I may slow my posting rate. Mostly locals at my table who can post multiple times a day so we're all in the same time zone, etc.

We are in the middle of our second area. To be honest, I have run this multiple times on VTT and we typically get into but not through the second area. That may change with the new scenario timing.

I don't think We are supposed to run Event 4. The scenario says event 4 runs when the threat meter hits 4, but on an earlier page it states the House should manage rests to avoid letting the threat meter hit 4.

There is definitely some disparity between tables regarding speed of progress. This is always true for a multi-table special and I believe that it is sometimes more so for PbP. Or maybe it is just easier to notice and discuss.

The aim of the game is for everyone to have fun. Do your best. If you need to, run the events sequentially.

You have now achieved all the General successes.
You are two tables away from one Location success and three away from another.
You are two tables away from the final Fortification progress "Pathfinder Reinforcements".

Seven more rests will trigger Event 3. Events 1 and 2 were guaranteed, event 3 considered likely. I believe we are actually a little shy of the rests that should have been reported given the location successes reported, so the events are actually triggering slightly later.

We have 11 days before we transition to Act 2.

I am collecting feedback and questions to pass on to Alex. If you have anything specific you want included, please DM or email me. (gmnumbat at gmail dot com)

I believe the comment on the House managing rests to avoid Threat Meter 4 is a statement about the House not the House GM, so if tables are wasteful with their rests, then Even 4 would definitely happen.

In the future, I'd suggest instructing table GMs to only report a rest if it's *not* after immediately completing an area. I think that will lead to fewer accounting discrepancies (we're currently at 20 location successes but only 18 rests, an impossibility).

Is another rest forced on each table at the end of Act 1? I *think* so, but I'm not sure.

Also: The tracker spreadsheet doesn't seem to have the right goal thresholds set. We have 16 tables, but the location success thresholds are set at 10 each. 10/16 is less than 2/3, so I think the threshold is supposed to be 11 successes. I think there are other "round up" issues on the sheet.

Sure, Farol. I will take note of that.

Just a friendly nudge ;) I think Dungeon Master S is beginning his 2-day wild wedding. On our table he said, I quote: If you think that this special is insane, you have never been with me on a wedding! (Ok this is not exactly what he said) but you get the picture ;)

So what I am basically saying is that your backing up is up ;)

Thank you for the reminder, GM Farol. I will check the table later today when I get home.

I do, in fact, begin! Thanks Farol for the post, and Frost for the coverage!

I do, in fact, begin! Thanks Farol for the post, and Frost for the coverage!

Your very welcome!

Enjoy the wedding! Snatch a piece of cake for us ;) Makai's ascension has begun!

Another reminder - if you report a location success you should also report a rest.

It's probably going to be harder to track errors in Rests with Pathfinder Reinforcements in play.

Just had a bit of fun with the two sisters.

One of the players had asked if there were any messages for Pathfinders. I decided there weren’t any for that name or variants of it.

Later one of the other players left a message under their name and Pathfinders. Once the statue had received the message, it turned to the one who had asked about messages for Pathfinders and delivered the message to them.

I repeat my question from above: Are we using the correct reporting thresholds for area successes, etc? We have 16 tables, so to get to 2/3, we need 11 successes, not 10.

I repeat my question from above: Are we using the correct reporting thresholds for area successes, etc? We have 16 tables, so to get to 2/3, we need 11 successes, not 10.

I was waiting for Numbat to respond. But, the sheet itself on purpose rounds down. There is a general rule saying that unless specified otherwise in PF2 you always round down. I scanned the scenario which only speaks about 2/3, which means in our case 10 successes.

Unless there is some clarification anywhere saying to round up :| But I couldn't find any

Wow. The Tier 5-6 skeletons can only climb the stairs to get to the PCs on an 18 or higher. Good thing nobody walks around with slings of striking. Heh.

Oh, hm. I didn't think the "round down" rule applied to a calculation like this-- there's no in-game effect of the number of accumulated successes / you don't "need" an integer. So I figured it was "has the number of successes reached two-thirds of the number of tables?"

For PFS scenarios with a success conditions of, "if at least half of the PCs succeed on the check", and there are five PCs, does the group need two successes or three successes?

Two is less than half of five, so they'd need three successes. I'd round up to 11 in this case as well, but maybe rounding down to 10 is kinder to the players.

Hi team, sorry for not responding to the rounding question earlier.

The language in the PDF discusses "successes equal to..." and at no point over rides the general rule for rounding down. If it had stated "at least..." then I would have rounded up. I remember the rounding up being something for past specials but thought it likely a deliberate change. It is not one of the things I specifically asked Alex about.

It's probably going to be harder to track errors in Rests with Pathfinder Reinforcements in play.

True.

My players finished their second of three areas a little while ago. We have 8.5 days left, and are at 5 of 10 success on the Sunken Halls (7 of 10 if the House GM chooses to apply excess Labyrinth success to the Sunken Halls).

Should my table forgo starting the Sunken Halls? There's very little chance they'll be one of the next 3 (or 5) tables to finish it, but they'd likely complete it within the time allotted. With the structure of this special, starting this area is trading the private fun of "play more Pathfinder" for the public cost of "raise threat meter" due to an extra required rest.

Is it bad etiquette if they want to go ahead? How much should they know about the cost to the house?

Also: Location Successes and Rests continue to diverge: 27 Location successes vs 21 Rests.

I think you should let them play. They won't earn Rests unless they retreat from the area.

Sitting out a week of PbP is like sitting out 40 minutes of live play. While I guess a table could mutually agree to stop playing until the next section because they didn't want to risk character death, that's not something I'd impose as the GM.

Location Successes and Rests will no longer run parallel because of the Reinforcements condition, and it will be very difficult to distinguish mistakes from use of those benefits after that triggered.

I forgot to report a rest. Thanks.

I mean, it's up to them, really, but a Sunken Halls success after Part 2 starts still counts towards future successes, so it's not like they're missing out on content or slowing the other tables down. Just let them keep playing, I'd say.

Page 7, bottom of left column:
Because tables complete and report encounters at different rates, some tables may report successes for missions after you’ve already announced that the location has been cleared. You can apply these successes to either of the remaining location goals in Act 1, using your judgement to determine which is better for the pacing of the game.

We just finished the third area. Used the Reinforcements to rest without reporting a rest.

If any table wants to rest rather than start a new area, that should be fine and would not be detrimental to the group as a whole. On the other hand, I expect most players want to keep playing.

All location successes are currently being counted toward the percentage complete. 3 more successes will tip us into Act 2. I am not sure how close we are to those successes being reported. It is possible they will pile in quickly in which case any break now will be short. Otherwise, in a little less than 5 days we will move forward regardless.

I can tell you my group just needs to decide what to do with the statues and we will be completing our final area. and that is happening both in the table I'm GMing and the table I'm playing in and I suspect those will both get wrapped up in the next 24 hours.

Ack, I forgot about Pathfinder Reinforcements. And I missed the schedule change; only 5 days left, not 8. Whoops.

My party cleared the final combat of part 1, now just needs to explore the rest of the Sunken Halls. Don't think they'll be done before part 2 begins, but it'll be soon after.

I am about to post the transition to Act 2 as the success requirements dictate.

Everyone returns to camp, if you are in combat, then reinforcements arrive with the messenger and help defeat or chase off any remaining foe. The group moves into Act 2 together.

Please be careful to report Act 2 successes in the correct sections.

I will update the timeline as soon as I can.

How do we report successes for Part 1, now that we're in Part 2? Do we need to note something, or will you keep track of everything that goes over 100%?