The issue with clerics is not that they have too much healing, it is that in combat healing feels almost mandatory given monster accuracy and damage output. Severely reducing the channel pool without addressing monster math doesnt change the mandatory nature of in combat healing, it just means clerics end up having to prepare more heal spells in their vey limited spell slots.
Joy, we are back to 1e/2e with clerics as required heal bots. I forsee this being a bit of a disaster in PFS given the random nature of such groups.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
Is this confirmation publically available somewhere?
Alexander Geuze wrote:
It doesnt have greater vital strike. Its tactics refer to it using this but it only has Improved. This also requires it to be in a position to attack. It only has a 20' fly speed with a fly skill of -4 so it is unlikely to be able to keep up with anyone in the air, which is a lot of people at 10-11.
Its odd that I could probably have solo'ed the stupid thing with my sorcerer. Fighting it with the rest of the group would have made thins more awkward.
They decide to go clockwise from here. I planted some of those spores in the next room. Bard wants to harvest/disable them, has a decent chance, but fails completely. Here I must admit I screwed up slightly. I conflated the two traps and thought this also summoned the Reaver.
You were right to do this. Mucking up on the spores also summons the reaver.
Page 10 wrote:
I played this at the weekend and none of use fell to the reaver traps at any point. We did the various stuff inside and fought the weakened reaver without any difficulties. It lasted less than two rounds. Having now prepped it we could certainly have fought it at full strength. Frankly I think plenty of low tier parties could do so as well. It is largely a big bag of stupid HP. Sure it hits hard if you choose to stand and trade full attacks with it but its maneuverability is awful as are its saves, even with the second save thing.
I have only had one full read through and so far the editing looks pretty poor as well. Various references which dont make sense, information scattered about, multiple different options for what the reavers stat block should look like and some weird inconsistecies.
In particular the injured war priest is quite literally sitting next to something which can heal him of his inuuries and has the spell he needs to do so himself prepared and with the component.
Bob Jonquet wrote:
It also assume that we will no longer be expected to audit characters
The vast majority of audits I have done or been subject to are looking at character option legality. I find gold and purchase audits are almost non existant although I do sometimes ask people to send me their ITS along with character sheet just to have a quick check. It is surprising how many people dont know what an ITS is.
Pirate Rob wrote:
Pretty much this. I suggest sending it up the chain of command or simply avoiding this persons tables.
Just do it at the end of the session. Nothing says that the game ends when you report back to the venture captain. In fact quite often you might need to take several more days to resolve a disease or curse for example.
If your GM has an issue with it simply delay reporting back to your VC at the end by a day or two so you can prep relevant spells and load them into any spell storing items.
Likewise, doing things like sharing spells between prepared casters is something which routinely takes place at the end of a scenario.
I am also interested in this.
Human oracle 1 (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player's Guide 42)
NG Medium humanoid (human)
Init +4; Senses Perception +5
Oracle Spells Known (CL 1st; concentration +5)
Skills Acrobatics -5 (-9 to jump), Bluff +9, Diplomacy +8, Knowledge (arcana, geography, history, local, religion) +8, Perception +5
SQ oracle's curse (haunted), revelations (lore keeper, sidestep secret)
Combat Gear scrolls of magic weapon (2), comprehend languages, acid (3); Other Gear hide armor, heavy wooden shield, cold iron morningstar, dagger, sling, sling bullets (10), backpack, belt pouch, flint and steel, ink, inkpen, paper (10), spell component pouch, wooden holy symbol of Desna, 13 gp, 8 sp
I am prepping The Frozen Oath at the moment and have a few questions.
1. The Roc Wing Rebuff reaction doesn't seem to work. It only interrupts movement if it pushes. the Roc only has the regular push ability, not improved and as such it can only use it on its turn with an action. It can therefore never disrupt movement.
2. No DC is given to resist the Awakening Curse, is it intended to be automatic?
3. In C2 is it intended that each PC can ony attempt the ritual once or that omly one PC can. Can other PCs aid someone attempting the ritual.
4. There is no scaling entry for C3 although this doesnt seem like much of a combat encounter.
5. Rain of blows takes 3 actions which seems to make the MAP entry irrelevant.
Kurald Galain wrote:
Certainly. The reason is that reach is extremely useful on a melee character. You want to make full attacks as often as possible, so what about if an enemy is just out of reach, or flying when you're not, or you drop an enemy and have attacks left in your sequence? Being able to reach an extra square will significantly expand your options there.
One thing to note about Lunge which loads of people seem to miss, if you want to use it you have to declare you are doing so before making any attacks. You cannot turn it on mid attack sequence.
Paul Jackson wrote:
I created four for some independnt testing I was doing. People are free to use or amend as they want. I wasnt particularly careful about how much uncommon content they used as it wasnt for a PFS scenario so you may want to be alert to that.
I have to say that I found the sniper encounter one of the single most tedious experiences of my life. Spending an hour+ having the entire group saying I double move and drop prone while well screened enemies take pot shots at us with sniper rifles from 600' away was less interesting than watching paint dry. The only worse experiences have been 2 hour+ space combats and that session of assault on the wound where I spent 3 hours saying "I move my army one hex".
I appreciate the desire to showcase other styles of combat but the reality, certainly from my experience, is that only a tiny fraction of the player base uses sniper weapons. Given the likelihood of any such players being at a table it just creates an extremely annoying experience for everyone else.
Please dont do this again.
Hi, as I mntioned none of my low level core characters are currently free and I wasnt particularly looking at making a new one. I could drop a level 2 as I have various emerald spire credit GM babies if I need to but I would rather use an existing character. Both options (Cleric 2 and Sorcerer 4) are currently in Gameday part 1 games.
Scott Young wrote:
They are, however, the map shows them as being large creating a false impression for people running it who don't spot the mistake.
I did run this encounter once and had them grabbing people at range and then moving them to an adjacent square beneath the merrow, underwater. I think that is legal per the grappling rules and it proved quite dangerous. Staying underwater also helped as people weren't really prepared for that.
Scott Young wrote:
Yes, but this is true for all undead. These mummies were held out as being specially adapted to their environment. I had PC's using cold damage on them which just seemed really bizarre, I was expecting them to be resistant or immune to cold.
James Anderson wrote:
3. The DC of the poison goes up for EVERY EXPOSURE, whether they make their save or not. I had players track their exposures without telling them exactly why.
This isn't right as per the poison Blog
2. The saving throw DC is increased by +2 for every active dose currently affecting the character. Poisons that were cured, have run through their entire frequency, or were negated with a successful initial saving throw do not increase the DC
The simple answer to this is that the onus is on the player to explain what they are doing, where it is from, how it works and why it is legal. If they cannot do so then they dont get to do it. I for one will give players 5 minutes or so to explain and then move on. I am also much less impressed with people who try to throw in this nonsense mid sessions rather than talking to me in advance. It is why I always ask for character sheets in advance when I run online.
Quairon Nailo wrote:
Also, i realized a lot of their bloodline powers are not very good, ie. Ancestral Surge: An action and a Spell Point for... the ability for that turn to expend another action and another Spell Point in increasing the duration of a spell in one round. What the hell?
It increases the DC of the spell you use it on.
Ferious Thune wrote:
That is, as noted, what the previous guide technically required. But it has not been enforced by the campaign since the campaign began. Individual areas may have enforced it, because that is what they wanted to do. The point being that a) the crackdown was targeted at the online region instead of being directed at everyone, and b) the crackdown was not necessary, because the issue in that situation lies with the player not filling out their chronicles, not with the GMs.
In my experience the success of such a crackdown is about as effective as trying to make people do it for face to face games, which is to say not at all. I can probably count the number of fully completed chronicles I have received from any GM on the fingers of one hand.
I wouldnt drop a blizzard on the players but I would see any issue with using ice or snow rules in the various encounters.
One thing I did notice, depsite apparently being "adapted to the cold envoronment" the enemies at the end hav pretty much nothing to help them against cold damage or terrain issues.
One other issue cropped up when I ran this recently.
If the group goes directly to the site they encounter the fey. At high tier she comes with 3 allies. The map assumes these allies are large, they are not. The stat blocks, both in the scenario and on the PRD show them as huge. That both makes the map a bit cramped and makes them far more dangerous.
As every else has said your GM is wrong if just going by the rules. I am not clear from your post whether this is a home game or a PFS group. You are posting in the PFS section of the forums and PFS GM's are required to run according to the rules, at least the rules as they best understand them. Sometimes, where things are ambiguous, you will find variation on how the rules work. This really isnt one of those times. Your character has darkvision from their bloodline.
If this is a home game then it is up to you and the GM to agree things between you. This really should have happened when you took the sorcerer level.
The Pakalchis are in league with Citizen Dread, the chief Grey Gardner. They are controlling the undead creatures although how is unclear as they have no way of doing so.
As drwho's GM he got unlucky as the group killed the Pakalchis first. The entire party had death ward from a void kineticist so they ignored the other threat and when the last one went down it sang out. It didnt help that their wizard was unconscious from wisdom damage.
James Anderson wrote:
The first round and a half are brutal fighting, as the big guy moves up and then fixes one hole. And then every mummy turns their attention on him, and the combat ceases to be an issue.
I am prepping this at the moment and this looks like it is only an issue in low tier. High tier tactics have them ganging up on people to get flanking.
EDIT: Looks like this is contradicted by the body of the text.
One thing I have noticed is that Encounter C seems to lack a 4 player adjustment. That could be particularly bad for low tier parties where the beastie is really quite dangerous.
Doug Hahn wrote:
I ran it without as I couldn't find where, exactly, it says alchemist bombs get sneak attack.
You cannot sneak attack with splash weapons outside of certain class abilities however NPC's often break the rules annd given her tactics make explicit reference to it I am inclined to run it as intended.
I have played this and run it once at high tier. I will be running it again on wednesday.
Its an enjoyable scenario with a lot going on to keep track of but there do seem like there are some issues.
Ilchok looks incredibly dangerous at low tier. With a +5 bab, power attack and favoured enemy human he is hitting against human targets twice per round at +9 for 1d8+10 damage. That's pretty brutal.
When we played this we kept Bosk alive for the full 5 rounds. Our GM gave us a warning about uusing magic following a high heal check although the scenario doesnt seem to provide for that. We also used speak with dead afterwards and it would havve been nice if that was addressed somewhere.
I liked the GM handouts, the timeline was particularly helpful as the narrative description of it is less than clear. The map showing travel times was also invaluable. When we played we had a skald with the song that lets you hustle without risk which cut down time significantly. We still went the wrong way and lost Ramyla.
On the difficulty issue the fungi can be dangerous but the rogues just are not very threatening. The high tier lot can do a chunk in an invisiblity initiated surprise round but after that they are toast. They lack the defences or damage against level 4-5 PCs.
I have run Cladara as getting sneak attack with her bombs even though it is not supported by the rules. Not that she managed to do much, as she lost initiative, threw her poisoned dagger and was promptly surrounded by 6 melee characters. Hitting her morale condition I decided not to provoke 6 opportunity attacks drawing a cure light potion. It would have been nice if she had something like spider climb to give a bit more survivability.