Here We Come A’Slithering!

2 of them error here for me, but all show up in the pdf.

Edit: Fixed Now.

The links on this page still seem broken (and the images expected to accompany them just aren't there at all).

Eyeball Tsunami wrote:

having player's die of the curse could be dramatically fun and interesting for the adventure, but might get old after a while...

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

I've found "if you die in the game, you die in real life" to really improve player engagement.

Fumarole wrote:

Eyeball Tsunami wrote:

having player's die of the curse could be dramatically fun and interesting for the adventure, but might get old after a while...

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

I've found "if you die in the game, you die in real life" to really improve player engagement.

This seems noticeably like a plot point of some movies as well as at least one Star Trek episode . . . .

PFS Pregens have been out since day 1

I am aware of that. But the Organized Play pregens were presented on character sheets, not as stat blocks.

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

Now, now. If everyone is having fun, that's all the matter. ;-)

Playing an all-human party actually sounds like a fun way to hard-mode this module if possible.

Eyeball Tsunami wrote:

having player's die of the curse could be dramatically fun and interesting for the adventure, but might get old after a while...

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

If your players die unexpectedly during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

I've run Tomb of Horrors, Rappan Athuk, and Minion Quest, as well as a homebrew meatgrinder I built called the Proving Paradox, and my players had lots of fun. They know to show up to those games with a stack of character sheets. :P

Fumarole wrote:

Eyeball Tsunami wrote:

having player's die of the curse could be dramatically fun and interesting for the adventure, but might get old after a while...

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

If your players die unexpectedly during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

I've run Tomb of Horrors, Rappan Athuk, and Minion Quest, as well as a homebrew meatgrinder I built called the Proving Paradox, and my players had lots of fun. They know to show up to those games with a stack of character sheets. :P

I think it was an allusion to the comment reading "players," rather than "characters." ;-)

I really like the final version of Devise A Stratagem.

An extra bonus to attack and Sneak Attack level damage once per turn is worse than a Rogue's combat options in isolation, but the ability to just abort attacks you're pretty sure won't hit is gold and the pregen even has the actions to make good use of turns where she rolls a 1 on her hypothetical attack (specifically, she's not half bad at Intimidate and has Battle Medicine).

That combo makes Investigator do something very unique in terms of combat options, without being overpowering, but while feeling awesome. I mean, it's very plausible that you will simply never miss an attack on an Investigator...few other characters can say that. You'll certainly miss less often than just about anyone else.

Rogue Multiclass is also looking really good for Investigators. Since they're stuck with a similar weapon list, the 1d6 Sneak Attack is a really solid pick up mechanically (as well as being easy to justify thematically).

Do we know when it will be sanctioned for Organized Play? I'm asking since I'm plan to find a Gm in a play by Discord and know if I should ask as a pf2 society section or non society.

MaxAstro wrote:

Fumarole wrote:

Eyeball Tsunami wrote:

having player's die of the curse could be dramatically fun and interesting for the adventure, but might get old after a while...

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

If your players die unexpectedly during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

I've run Tomb of Horrors, Rappan Athuk, and Minion Quest, as well as a homebrew meatgrinder I built called the Proving Paradox, and my players had lots of fun. They know to show up to those games with a stack of character sheets. :P

I think it was an allusion to the comment reading "players," rather than "characters." ;-)

Hah! Good catch, that went right over my head. :)

The "non human" thing is one of the strengths of the stand-alone adventure format. It lets us try things out, experiment with storylines in ways we'd be timid or simply couldn't do for something like a full Adventure Path that takes up an entire half-year.

And of course, gnomes and halflings and elves and dwarves aren't human either, so they'll work fine too... we just wanted to show off some of the newer ancestries and this adventure was a perfect chance to do so.

I thought all of the core ancestries are cursed with this?,ah well, time to create some enticing rewards for non-core ancestry players ;-)

Ooh I'm not seeing anything Cackle-like on the witch pre-gen. I love the look of this adventure though it's unlikely I'll get to play it.

Ooh I'm not seeing anything Cackle-like on the witch pre-gen. I love the look of this adventure though it's unlikely I'll get to play it.

Cackle is now a 1st level feat selection and a focus power that lets you sustain a spell for one round as a free action.

Cackle is now a 1st level feat selection and a focus power that lets you sustain a spell for one round as a free action.

This is sweet. I mean, it's only good if you have spells you need to sustain, but getting to do that for free once per fight if you don't have a better use for a Focus Point is pretty nice.

Xenocrat wrote:

Cackle is now a 1st level feat selection and a focus power that lets you sustain a spell for one round as a free action.

This is sweet. I mean, it's only good if you have spells you need to sustain, but getting to do that for free once per fight if you don't have a better use for a Focus Point is pretty nice.

All the Witch Focus spells are sustained, and their only focus cantrip (each patron theme have a different one) is sustained as well, so it works with the class kit.

Cackle is now a 1st level feat selection and a focus power that lets you sustain a spell for one round as a free action.

Thanks for that info. I'm glad that it isn't just a reflavored sustain as it was in the playtest material, and while I'm happy to have a cackler (I know some folks don't like that) moving it to a feat choice was probably the right move (even if I'd already heard that news).

Fumarole wrote:

Eyeball Tsunami wrote:

having player's die of the curse could be dramatically fun and interesting for the adventure, but might get old after a while...

If your players die during your games you're doing something horribly wrong.

I've found "if you die in the game, you die in real life" to really improve player engagement.

I've been giving it a shot, but my GMs never have any feedback to give after the session.

I really like the final version of Devise A Stratagem.

An extra bonus to attack and Sneak Attack level damage once per turn is worse than a Rogue's combat options in isolation, but the ability to just abort attacks you're pretty sure won't hit is gold and the pregen even has the actions to make good use of turns where she rolls a 1 on her hypothetical attack (specifically, she's not half bad at Intimidate and has Battle Medicine).

That combo makes Investigator do something very unique in terms of combat options, without being overpowering, but while feeling awesome. I mean, it's very plausible that you will simply never miss an attack on an Investigator...few other characters can say that. You'll certainly miss less often than just about anyone else.

Rogue Multiclass is also looking really good for Investigators. Since they're stuck with a similar weapon list, the 1d6 Sneak Attack is a really solid pick up mechanically (as well as being easy to justify thematically).

It's a weird ability to do the math on, because it's all about situational choices. So I suspect people will either call it too strong, too weak, or both in equal measure.

I think they want to use ranged weapons almost exclusively though, because you can change targets if DaS tells you you'll miss one target much more easily.

It's a weird ability to do the math on, because it's all about situational choices. So I suspect people will either call it too strong, too weak, or both in equal measure.

Yeah, your DPR is gonna be pretty bad, honestly, at least by martial standards, but the in-combat utility is really potentially amazing.

I think they want to use ranged weapons almost exclusively though, because you can change targets if DaS tells you you'll miss one target much more easily.

Eh. It's pretty arguable that attacking is just not worth it most of the time if you don't get your bonuses from Devise A Stratagem. You can definitely build an archer who it's worth it for, but your non-Int based attacks will be sub-par compared to just about every other non-spellcaster.

A melee Investigator can abort to non-attacks just as easily as a ranged one, and if built properly those should be a better option than sub-par attacks are. You can also definitely abort, move, and attack another target as a melee Investigator a lot of the time, which is valid if you have no better options.
.
.
.
In somewhat related news, Oraka's stats are also off. Others have already noted that she has one too many stat-ups, but her Athletics and Thievery are both also one too low for her stats as presented assuming they're intended to be Expert (and if they aren't she has too few Expert Skills).

vagrant-poet wrote:

I think they want to use ranged weapons almost exclusively though, because you can change targets if DaS tells you you'll miss one target much more easily.

Eh. It's pretty arguable that attacking is just not worth it most of the time if you don't get your bonuses from Devise A Stratagem. You can definitely build an archer who it's worth it for, but your non-Int based attacks will be sub-par compared to just about every other non-spellcaster.

A melee Investigator can abort to non-attacks just as easily as a ranged one, and if built properly those should be a better option than sub-par attacks are. You can also definitely abort, move, and attack another target as a melee Investigator a lot of the time, which is valid if you have no better options.

It’s also nice when you aren’t adjacent yet; you can Devise before moving into melee. Heck, you might even know if you need to position yourself into a flank, or save some movement/risk of AOO to just move into the nearest adjacent square.

Wait, can a ranged investigator use Devise a Stratagem? Or is it just the int-to-hit that you don't get from not having agile/finesse, or is it the damage, or both?

Wait, can a ranged investigator use Devise a Stratagem? Or is it just the int-to-hit that you don't get from not having agile/finesse, or is it the damage, or both?

It also works with ranged weapons, yes, getting both the ability to use Int to hit and the bonus damage. The way the ability technically reads is as follows:

"When she makes this substitution, she can add her Intelligence modifier to her attack roll instead of her Strength or Dexterity modifier, provided her Strike is using an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, a ranged weapon (which must be agile or finesse if it’s a melee weapon with the thrown trait), or a sap."

And the damage is conditional to the adding Int-mod to attack, at least per people who have the book.

So technically, you can use the 'pre-roll' effect with any weapon, but for the Int-to-hit and bonus damage you need to limit your melee weapon choices, or use a ranged one.

Oh, wow! I totally misread that. I have a player who's about to be VERY happy.

I like the non-human approach and am all for having different types of adventures than the usual.

TBH my first reaction was negative because of the humans-only curse bit. After some introspection, I realized that this is due to the current events. In usual times, I would have thought it quite interesting. But these days, something targeting a specific race hits me as poor timing. Sorry about that.

Thankfully, reading this thread helped me get back to a more open-mind :-)

Now, humans-only curse + Aspis consortium + slithering + the recent posts from the esteemed Mr. Jacobs about Serpentfolk being currently not fit for an Ancestry due to evil plans brewing = conspiracy theory of the day. The Serpentfolk use the Aspis Consortium to hide in plain sight while they gather the resources needed to destroy Humankind and start their Empire anew.

And all the fuss about Veiled Masters was really misdirection.

TBH my first reaction was negative because of the humans-only curse bit. After some introspection, I realized that this is due to the current events. In usual times, I would have thought it quite interesting. But these days, something targeting a specific race hits me as poor timing. Sorry about that.

Thankfully, reading this thread helped me get back to a more open-mind :-)

Now, humans-only curse + Aspis consortium + slithering + the recent posts from the esteemed Mr. Jacobs about Serpentfolk being currently not fit for an Ancestry due to evil plans brewing = conspiracy theory of the day. The Serpentfolk use the Aspis Consortium to hide in plain sight while they gather the resources needed to destroy Humankind and start their Empire anew.

And all the fuss about Veiled Masters was really misdirection.

Or the Veiled Masters are using the serpentfolk as cat’s paws for their eon spanning plans. Wheels within wheels within wheels.

Murder by death springs to mind.

A melee Investigator can abort to non-attacks just as easily as a ranged one, and if built properly those should be a better option than sub-par attacks are. You can also definitely abort, move, and attack another target as a melee Investigator a lot of the time, which is valid if you have no better options.

It's a lot more flexible to be able to devise shoot shoot or devise different target 3rd action free, especially when you are Int based, lightly armored, with I imagine some less class based incentives for decent Wis.

A melee investigator is no doubt fine, but devise hampers your actions for a turn in a way ranged attacks don't, while you are unlikely to have the Str to make melee more damaging.

That's my thinking. I found playtest Investigators also much better with a shortbow than any melee weapon. And I don't see that changing. It's mostly about the flexibility of your two action turns.

It's a lot more flexible to be able to devise shoot shoot or devise different target 3rd action free, especially when you are Int based, lightly armored, with I imagine some less class based incentives for decent Wis.

I honestly just think any turn you have to fall back on your non-Stratagem enhanced attack is probably a bad turn. You want to avoid it happening as much as you can. It's a better option with a ranged weapon, I don't dispute, but that's making your worst case scenario better, not improving options you actually want to use.

This strategy is also not very helpful vs. single foes, in many ways the most dangerous threats in PF2. Melee Investigators don't have an advantage vs. those either (well, except for flanking), but an advantage that only really applies vs. less dangerous enemies and only makes a backup option better just doesn't seem to be a huge advantage to me. It's certainly a boost, but I feel like it's a small one in absolute terms.

It's like one melee character having a good ranged option while another doesn't. It's solid, but not a 'this build is notably better' kind of thing.

A melee investigator is no doubt fine, but devise hampers your actions for a turn in a way ranged attacks don't, while you are unlikely to have the Str to make melee more damaging.

It does open you up to shield use, which makes an 8 HP class a lot harder to kill, though the action economy of that is of course its own issue. Flanking is also really great for accuracy, and if you roll a bit sub-par, a move to flank followed by using that roll will often hit (vs. on level foes, a flanking Investigator often needs an average of 6 or so to hit, less if other buffs are in play...a ranged Investigator can rarely spend an action for an equivalent boost to hitting, meaning they can do this less often). It also enables the Rogue multiclass idea I mentioned above, with an extra 1d6 Sneak attack being a solid damage buff a ranged Investigator has a lot more trouble accessing.

Basically, I think melee Investigators have more options to improve how they function and more actions they can take to make their Stratagem attack hit. If you don't take any of those options, and certainly if you don't have any non-attack combat options, ranged will be better in many ways, but I'm not sure that'll be the norm.

So I'm not saying that ranged doesn't have real advantages, it clearly does, I'm just noting that I think they're a bit less 'must-have' than you seem to be saying. An effective ranged Investigator is probably an easier build, than an effective melee one, certainly in terms of tactics, but I'm not at all convinced that either is better once you start actually building them.

That's my thinking. I found playtest Investigators also much better with a shortbow than any melee weapon. And I don't see that changing. It's mostly about the flexibility of your two action turns.

The mechanics are so different I'm not sure how valid a test this is of how the new Investigator works.

Devise a Stratagem makes Reload 1 weapons way better, because you keep your weapon ready if you know you are going to miss.

So you Devise, if you are going to hit, reload and fire, if not, you can do X and reload for the next turn or do another 2 things and see if the next turn you got a better roll at Devise Stratagem.

This also means the melee throwing weapons are super versatile for the Investigator, because you can use them in Melee with your Int bonus and you can treat them as a 1 action reload ranged weapon.

It is true that I don´t expect for the Investigator to carry the damage in the team, most of the rounds is going to be 1 attack and others 0 attacks, but the flow of this class in combat seems pretty unique.

Sounds fun but the non-human constraint really bothers me. It's not about min-maxing and you should'nt have to houserule to enjoy the game. I would've expected more from a company that claims to care about diversity and freedom of choice - big red flag right there! Still going to play it though, since it sounds really good and my group's all hyped for it lol.

One adventure having a premise of "you can't play as one specific ancestry" doesn't somehow make Paizo anti-diversity...

And you can't play them because they specifically are being supernaturally attacked as a group, so it's up to their non-human neighbors to find a solution and save them.

Never guessed I'd run across people who found a clever, compelling hook like this and feel attacked by it.

I'm not very enthusiastic about the fact that an adventure in which Garundi and Mwangi characters would have worked very well excludes all humans. I totally understand why that is and I think experimenting is a great use of adventures, but it sounds so much like a wasted possibility... I hope we'll have more adventures in Garund in the future!

Bashing some Aspis Consortium f$~&ers in the head is also great news, no matter if it's serpentfolk, alghollthu or anything else behind them (although I'd prefer it were just them and their immoral, bigoted greed).

I love that we'll have orcs to play with - I hope we finally have a less monolithically CE ancestry here, and that we manage to ditch the "racial stereotype from less enlightened times" angle. Goblins were very well done in Lost Omens Character Guide (for instance it explained the mostly evil ones in Varisia are young individuals who hate the trespassing long-shanks and that their clashes with them killed off the older ones who could have given them more of a culture and softened their rougher tendencies). I hope the way orcs are portrayed, not just Garundi ones but Avistani as well, becomes less essentialist and more nuanced.

I'm not in love with kobolds right now. I like the breath weapon very much, less so all the special abilities like Cringe and Grovel who make them appear like comic reliefs so much. I think if you need to make a species ridiculous in order to have it resonate with players then there's something wrong somewhere. I hope those are not all the options we'll have with kobolds (yes, they're cute; no, they don't need to be stupid and cowardly).

The investigator's new combat ability sounds interesting and better than the playtest one, although I personally would have liked a little more DPS. Maybe with a feat? Who knows. But it's good.

Yay for cackling being an option and not a witch-defining feature!

I'm not very enthusiastic about the fact that an adventure in which Garundi and Mwangi characters would have worked very well excludes all humans. I totally understand why that is and I think experimenting is a great use of adventures, but it sounds so much like a wasted possibility... I hope we'll have more adventures in Garund in the future!

Bashing some Aspis Consortium f%~@ers in the head is also great news, no matter if it's serpentfolk, alghollthu or anything else behind them (although I'd prefer it were just them and their immoral, bigoted greed).

I love that we'll have orcs to play with - I hope we finally have a less monolithically CE ancestry here, and that we manage to ditch the "racial stereotype from less enlightened times" angle. Goblins were very well done in Lost Omens Character Guide (for instance it explained the mostly evil ones in Varisia are young individuals who hate the trespassing long-shanks and that their clashes with them killed off the older ones who could have given them more of a culture and softened their rougher tendencies). I hope the way orcs are portrayed, not just Garundi ones but Avistani as well, becomes less essentialist and more nuanced.

I'm not in love with kobolds right now. I like the breath weapon very much, less so all the special abilities like Cringe and Grovel who make them appear like comic reliefs so much. I think if you need to make a species ridiculous in order to have it resonate with players then there's something wrong somewhere. I hope those are not all the options we'll have with kobolds (yes, they're cute; no, they don't need to be stupid and cowardly).

The investigator's new combat ability sounds interesting and better than the playtest one, although I personally would have liked a little more DPS. Maybe with a feat? Who knows. But it's good.

Yay for cackling being an option and not a witch-defining feature!

From what it seems, Grovel/Cringe seem like feat choices as well, so it might be possible to build a Kobold that's less comical than the usual assortment.

From what it seems, Grovel/Cringe seem like feat choices as well, so it might be possible to build a Kobold that's less comical than the usual assortment.

Indeed. It looks like 3-4 feat choices at each level demarkation and only one plays into the grovel chain (and one plays into the dragon heritage).

Reminds me that there is a kobold feat I know I've seen (but haven't been able to find for a while) that boiled down to "clan over self, but if you can make someone else die for the clan instead of you, that's even better." Effect was something along the lines of shoving an ally between you and danger and getting a bonus to ... AC? Reflex saves?

It was probably third party, but I can't remember the name of it or what its mechanical effect was (which is why I tried to find it a couple weeks ago).

Changing this adventure to allow humans is easy, folks. The point of the limitation is to tell a specific kind of story where we wanted encourage people to try out a more diverse cast of ancestries and play with all the new non-human options we're putting out—an anticipation of people wanting to play with a wider range of things than they could choose from in 1st edition.

It was never meant to be discriminatory against humans.

If you want to run "The Slithering" as a more standard adventure where any ancestry is workable, you can either treat the Slithering curse as something that simply doesn't target PCs, or even add a race-against-time if some PCs are affected, or so on.

It's something of an experiment as well, to find out how folks like adventures with these unusual setups, and until the adventure's been out for several months and we get feedback from folks who've had a chance to play or at least read the adventure, we won't have enough information to make a decision on whether or not this experiment was a success.

Certainly, having a more robust and regular schedule of stand-alone adventures would have helped, and going forward that's our goal, so that you don't have a situation where we are only publishing 1 adventure a year, if that.

In the meantime, please be patient and kind to each other. (Tip: Using terms like "SJW" automatically load your reply with antagonism and don't help.)

One a quarter would be a good goal, I think.

One a quarter would be a good goal, I think.

That has always been the goal.

Being antagonistic and confrontational in a post is not okay. Me calling out one example does not make all possible examples I don't call out fine. And since what is antagonistic and confrontational to one person will be different than what is for another, it's a moving target as for what is appropriate.

Be kind and patient to each other is all I'm asking. When someone isn't kind and patient, they cause those who reply to them to have a harder time being kind and patient with them. If someone says something you said was insulting or antagonistic, apologize to them and learn from the feedback. And if you say something antagonistic, try not to be surprised if others are impatient and lash back at you. If they do, that's another cue to back down, apologize, and maybe step away from the thread for a bit.