Balgin's page

Plus if you were to have the happy benevolent revolutionaries take over, that just sets up the sequel AP where things didn't go according to plan.

Ah but that would just be delaying the long awaited dwarven adventure path for even longer now wouldn't it? :p

Hello everybody,

as a long time GM I have known for quite some time that this AP was coming out. Initially I got excited. A war of succession has a lot of dramatic potential. Immediately I thought of the wars of king Steven and The Empress Maud who's war for the English crown raged from 1139 to 1147ad and forms a colourful background for the Brother Cadfael books (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Matilda).

However, as time drew on I began to suspect that we'd be talking less Steven & Maude and more Oliver Cromwell's revolution. It became apparent that the adventure path might be geared less towards a struggle for the throne and more towards radically altering Taldor altogether.

Now this presents a problem. I rather like Taldor. I like it the way it is. It has class structure, honour, tradition - it is an unchanging stable rock in the mad crazy world that is Golarion. You always know where you are with Taldor and it's nice to have something reliable to come back to once in a while.

When you take all of that away you're basically left with something like Andoran. A bunch of jumped up revolutionaries with no idea how to run things who think that being independent makes them oh so important and brag and boast about their independence without actually putting much thought into how to run a country or get along with their neighbours.

If it doesn't end up as bad as Andoran then you might end up with something like Cheliax (equally unpleasant to my pro Taldan outlook - I did mention a certain fondness for Taldor earlier, right?).

The reason that this is a problem Is that many of my players are quite excited about this adventure path. I am less enthusiastic than they are and it has been suggested that someone else run it but, the only other player willing to do so (and one of the vocal enthusiasts fr this AP) isn't inspiring a lot of confidence among the group in his abilities to GM it well.

I'm a bit of a traditionalist. When I see phrases like "let's modernise Taldor" I don't exactly feel enthusiastic about it. Instead I feel my shackles rising and want to rise up and fight back against this radical newfangled notion. In one regard this could almost make me the perfect GM for this AP. I can run encounters where npc's espouse the virtue of traditional values possibly causing the pc's to consider the values of their cause. If a pc is sneaking down a corridor and hears to guards standing by a door around a corner holding a conversation about the current political state of affairs maybe he'll stop to ask himself if he really needs to upset the apple cart. A defeated noble knight could lament the social ramifications of his defeat. He will now be unable to protect and provide for those under his charge. By trying to overthrow the "natural order of things" the pc's will be setting off chain reactions that have horrible ramifications for people further down the social ladder. This should be adequately reflected - possibly shaming them into mending their ways.

However, in the end, my gut feeling is that for the authors of this adventure path, Taldor is less like the comfy old armchair that we all know and love but rather an abomination like Gormenghast (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gormenghast_(series)), even 'though Gormenghast actually has it's charms. They want the players to see it as an oudated mess that barely functions. Something to be washed away amidst a tide of "modernisation". Unfortunately when you do away with tradition & culture everything becomes rather bland and same-ish. The McDonaldisation effect. Nobody in their right mind wants that.

An interesting twist would be to play princess Eutropia as a villain and the pc's as her villanous henchmen (or unwitting dupes). That could actually be quite a fun campaign to play. Playing it ironically (and often reminding the players that "of course, you know that what you're doing is actually bad, right?")

******

So my gut feeling is that perhaps I should simply refrain from running this adventure path because I personally strongly disagree with the underlying sentiment - the common cause, the theme of the campaign. It rankles me and I don't like it.

What do you people think? Do you think I could enjoy running this campaign? If so then please offer suggestions for ways in which I could find it enjoyable. I'd be most interested to read what people have to offer.

Oh I don't generally play Occult classes at all. I just feel that the archetype really fits the AP.

I don't know if I'll be playing or gm'ing this one but I'm rather taken with the notion of the Silksworn Occultist archetype from page 29 of the Heroes of the High Court book. It's basically an Occultist who wears silk and fancy garments who practically lives in high society.

Silksworn

Either way it would be nice to see it suggested in the player's guide.

Page 60

Winter Klaczka has Charisma 15, Extra Channel as a feat and only 6 Channel Energy attempts.

This should be 7/day. She's not a Life Oracle or something. 3 for cleric. 2 for Charisma, 2 for Extra Channel.

Copied over from the Obituaries thread....

So...

my group of self styled heroes rescued Chaplain Setrakian, the ghoul. They did not immediately realise he was a ghoul. When they led him into the Chapel and had Winter Klaczka (who's surname is really hard to pronounce, by the way, Klashjka is as close as I can get) channel energy to heal them they observed that Chaplain Setrakian was not healed by the power of his own goddess. More importantly, he noticed this. Poor Chaplain Setrakian fell into despair, believing that his goddess has turned her sight from him, casting him aside and bestowing her favours upon Winter Klaczka in his stead. He became morose, found little sustenance in the food that was offered him and eventually followed the heroes into the boiler room where he carnivorously devoured two giant rats they had just slain.

A few days later he wandered off looking for something to eat and was ambushed and slain by "Doctor" Ilaesi Scaen. The doppelganger who'd managed to escape the party earlier in our very first session. She throttled him then took his form and snuck into the sanctuary feeling very smug for herself.

A day or so later our heroes returned to the chapel and Baisily Harbour quietly mentioned to one of the heroes that Chaplain Setrakian was looking a bit better. More like his old self again. Perhaps he was starting to recover from whatever nasty event had occurred to him.

Shortly afterwards "Chaplain Setrakian" approached the heroes proclaiming that, as his goddess had abandoned him, he needed to seek a new path in life. He desired to assist them in exploring the ruins. Perhaps there were other survivors in need of rescue.

None of the players who had realised he was undead and realised he was a ghoul realised that .... undead don't heal over time. He shouldn't be looking healthier. He should not be benefiting from the healing abilities they used on him so far.

They still haven't realised. It's a new session tonight. Let's see if I get to make another entry here soon (I'm planning on yhaving Ilaesi Scaen/Setrakian kill off and replace a former pc who's player left the game with no intention of returning soon. Just not quite yet. Got to get the doppelganger to know them first so it can impersonate a former comrade more effectively).

I was actually really pleased that it's in there. One of my players wanted to play a Paladin, but was having a hard time deciding which deity to worship. She liked some of what Shelyn was about, but wasn't sure about her as a whole.

So, we came up with the idea of her "worshipping" Zon-Kuthon's former self Dou-Bral. Knowing full well that he is now evil, her paladin is trying to bring him back to the light from the darkness of whatever he encountered and was corrupted by in the Dark Tapestry.

It doesn't really work out with RAW, but I thought it was a pretty cool idea. I decided that Zon-Kuthon would grant her divine power out of some twisted humor and the assumption that with his power she would eventually corrupt herself.

So I think it'll be neat for her to find the shrine to him in the chapel, and it'll turn some heads when she goes and kneels before it in the morning.

This actually ties in with a heretical worshipper of Zon Kuthon in Shattered Star who is able to channel positive energy. He doesn't worship Duo Bral, however. He worships Zon Kuthon as someone who takes on the suffering of others and is (in his heretical belief) an innocent martyr who has simply been misunderstood by his orthodox worshippers.

Zon Kuthon isn't only about inflicting pain. He's also about enduring suffering. Since many of the inmates of the asylum are suffering conscientious staff members might offer a small prayer to Zon Kuthon from time to time for their favourite inmates.

"Oh please let this be enough. Hasn't he suffered enough already? I don't even try to understand why you must inflict such suffering upon him but please, could you just go easy for a few days? Grant him some of your strength that he may endure these nightmares."

If it really bothers them then you can always use the reality altering properties of the mist to explain anything to them. Maybe there is a pocket of it somewhere in the area that is altering the space enough where they can't use the most powerful tool a player has, an automatic knowledge of geometry and spacial placement.

How very Ravenloft of you (which is, of course, completely in keeping with the character of the mist anyway).

1) "Doctor" Ilesi Scaen: This doppelganger is a though opponent but according to its tactics, it will try to escape ASAP... but where does she go thereafter? It would make sense that she'd alert the other doppels, but then what? If I put her together with any of the others ones, it will be a slaughter for the PCs (at least a CR5 for a 1st level party).

If you want to be really nasty and/or cunning then have her clamber up into the courtyard above. Realising that she's going to have a hard time sneaking past the guards posted at the barricade (B3/B4) she sneaks into the collapsed ruins of the shed and hides.

Assuming your pc's don't discover her but, instead, head into the building and interact with the survivors, have her come across the sleepwalking Baisily Harbour and throttle her in frustration as she sleeps. Since Baisily could become replaced by a doppelganger why not use Ilesi Scaen for that role? It saves having to displace any of the other doppelgangers from their locations and allows the smiling "Baisily" to accompany the heroes on on their enxt excursion into the asylum. When she gets one alone the smiling chapel guard might turn very nasty and the wicked doctor could put in a fresh appearance.

Insert evil laughter here :). You know what? That was good. I should sue that when I run this thing......

Now I don't know about the physical edition but in the pdf pages 25-55 inclusive have their page numbers missing. Now I know the adventure's supposed to be set in an asylum and meant to have the pc's questioning their sanity but the gm shouldn't have to find himself questioning his own sanity simply trying to read the thing :P.

There's no artwork that would cover up the page numbers or anything. They simply aren't there.

how many points are you guys giving your players for point buy? I was thinking 15 and fave 4 players. didnt want them to be to powerful running through a horror campaign. at the same time i dont want them to die all the time, cause thats lame and no one will have any fun.

None. My players are going to roll dice :D.

Probably the 7d6 method (as tought to me yb a bloke who lived 'round the corner back in the 90's) or the 24d6 method.

The 7d6 method is easy. It allows for a controlled rolling method without the extreme control of point buy. You roll 7d6. Drop the lowest. Assign one to every ability score. Then you roll the same 7d6 again, drop the lowest assign (but not before assigning the first 6 numbers that you set). Finally you roll the last batch of dice, drop the lowest and assign.

This way you're not pre-assigning dice. A lot of people want to roll all 3 sets and then assign them but that's not in the spirit of the 7d6 system. You essentially get to build and prioritise as you go with enough randomness to avoid the repetitive cookie cutter builds that point buy tends to generate or the extreme variety of 3d6 rolled in order.

It's a nice and simple system. I like it. If the players aren't feeling in the mood for it then we'll use the 24d6 method from the core rulebook so that they can pre-assign dice instead.

Balgin wrote:

Hmm, while Lepidstadt (in Ustalav) obviously has a very Eastern European vibe it also has a very British feel to it's bureaucratic legal system (or very late Russian tsarist feel (very Crime & Punishment etc)). while not very British the character would be native to the area and fit the kind of vibe you were going for. It would also harken back to the Carrion Crown AP (itself set in Ustalav).

But then the people of Ustalav wouldn't be "quaint foreigners"! :D

Surely there's a rural/urban/suburban divide :P.

Balgin wrote:

While I agree with you entirely Paizo have, upon multiple occassions, suggested that it's similar to "Golarion's version of Game of Thrones". Andoren isn't very British. It's much more American revolution really.

Well, I was going for "First generation Andoren after parents had to leave Taldor in a hurry," especially since there really is no direct analogue for the particularly Victorian and paper-shuffly form of "British" I'm after for this character, who is going to be slightly bluestocking-esque.

Hmm, while Lepidstadt (in Ustalav) obviously has a very Eastern European vibe it also has a very British feel to it's bureaucratic legal system (or very late Russian tsarist feel (very Crime & Punishment etc)). while not very British the character would be native to the area and fit the kind of vibe you were going for. It would also harken back to the Carrion Crown AP (itself set in Ustalav).

I would strongly recommend looking up the Shadows of Esteren albums.

Let's see.

Shadows of Esteren: Of Men and Obscurities
Shadows of Esteren: Rise
Shadows of Esteren: Dearg
Shadows of Esteren: Of Love and Fury

Shadows of Esteren is a medieval roleplaying game with a strong Celtic influence that has elements of horror, psychology, the supernatural and the unknown. You should be able to listen to some free samples here.

Franz Lunzer wrote:

Insane KillMaster wrote:

About the Fugue State: about how long a period does it cover? Could someone have been raised there in that time? Born during that time? Conceived during that time? etc?

** spoiler omitted **

Kinda looking for a more "precise" answer/info, but thanks.

I believe, prior to the player's guide coming out, someone who should know suggested four or five years. The guide itself suggests a more vague period with considerable chunks of life missing although it also suggests the players and gm finding a mutual agreement as to exactly how much missing memory feels right for them (with a few years being recommended as the bare minimum). It does recommend pc's having memories of childhood at the very least.

Balgin wrote:

While I agree with you entirely Paizo have, upon multiple occassions, suggested that it's similar to "Golarion's version of Game of Thrones".

Yep, because of all the scheming noble houses. The Russian dvoryanstvo were just as scheming as our old nobility!

Oh absolutely. When people say British they can mean quite a lot of different things. I tend to prefer a wide variety of the periods of our green and pleasant land's history. I was trying to think of locations in Golarion that might fit the bill. Taldor is still probably the only likely location and it's much more Byzantine Empire than anything else.

Gratz wrote:

Balgin wrote:

Most British - probably Brevoy,...

I always pictured Brevoy as a somewhat Russian country...

Names like Surtova do tend to lend themselves to that sort of appraisal.

Might go with Andoren, but a childhood spent on the road, and a mother always harping about how great Taldor was/is and how if her father hadn't been so hellbent on spouting off like a Galtan demagogue...

While I agree with you entirely Paizo have, upon multiple occassions, suggested that it's similar to "Golarion's version of Game of Thrones". Andoren isn't very British. It's much more American revolution really.

The problem with lack of Britain analogue is, well, Cheliax was Britain, but due to what happened 100 years ago it lost that aspect of itself to become devil-land.

So you could sort of say it's Thatcher's Britain?

You could but it has a very italian flavour. The names, the Machiavellian extreme control freaks in charge, everyone living in villas.... bribery and corruption being institutionalised. It reeks of Venice.

As for evil Maggie sucking the country dry ... ugh... that brings back way too many painful childhood memories.

You know, I still need to get my arse in gear and start recording the rpgmp3.com playthrough at some point as well (just waiting for some existing games to finish off first).

Balgin wrote:

Venziir wrote:

So... Some people now have the first part of the AP before the Players Guide? That doesn't seem right.

It's a bit odd. Hopefully the situation resolves itself soon.

I would argue it is far from odd, but in fact the norm. Subscribers get PDFs when their order ships, (just ahead of street date) and the players guides are target to be ready by the street date (but often just make it.) I can't think of an AP I didn't get the first PDF before the players guide.

Ironically after writing my reply I went back and rewrote it. Originally I wrote a kind patient explanation of how some people subscribe to the adventure paths and get the pdf's a couple of weeks early. It is a priviledge and they pay for this privilege.

After I hit post I decided that maybe I'd misinterpreted Venziir's post. Maybe Venziir understood about the subscribers but was pointing out that it's unusual for the first book of an adventure path to come out before even the subscribers get the player's guide. Bearing that in mind I went back and replaced my previous message with another (probably far less condescending) one. Didn't want to upset Venzzir. Tone of voice does not convey well in written format.

My revised comment was to the effect that I thought it a little odd that even the subscribers hadn't got the player's guide yet.

That's what I get for trying to be considerate eh?

The sacrifices have been made, the old gods propitiated, but still the elusive player's guide does not appear! What have the cultists done to offend the great Paizo monster? What sacrifice must be made to make this ritual work?

Time probably. Just sacrifice time. And waiting. Lots and lots of waiting.

On the topic of Darkest Dungeon... I thought the art for the paladin section in Horror Adventures looked familiar. ^_^

It really does, doesn't it? :)

In the near future I'm starting a game with kids aged 12-18 through my work with a mental health agency. Largely because I own and like it I'm running Shards of Sin after the Beginner Box Bash encounters. If they're into it I'd like to advance them through the AP, because why not? The question I'd like answered is this: How easily can this module be adapted for this age group in an after-school group? I read this a while back and remember a good deal about the boggards and troglodytes but considerably less about the Lady's Light itself. Is it possible to get this instalment to a place that's appropriate for this group without throwing out half of it and losing the theme?

It's fairly possible. When running the game for adults someone might ask why Sorshen had an immovable rod in her bedroom. People might laugh, joke a bit, suggest it's a bit sticky etc. When running the game for kids just mention that it's an immovable rod and don't dwell on it.

There are various things in the Lady's Light that look quite innocent at first glance and can easily be glossed over for the kids without suggesting anything perverted. The only possible encounter you'll have to worry about is on the lower level where a few Grey Maidens are taking a bath. If a fight breaks out they'll grab swords and shields but will rush out to fight without any armour on. They might have wrapped in towels or something. Soap suds and shampoo in their hair etc.

You can play up this scene for comedy rather than anything suggestive. Most of the suggestive stuff in the dungeon is hinted at in the room descriptions without anything being explicitly spelled out. It's up to the players (and the gm) to infer what they will from the information that is present. For younger players simply omit a few details from boxed text and it should be fine.

I suppose there are a set of magical doors on the apprentice living quarters that automatically swing open at the touch of naked flesh (be it a hand, foot, cheek etc) but that's fairly innocent really. If the players don't come up with any filthy minded ways of operating those doors then they'll probably never realise as they aren't locked or anything and the handled & hinges work just fine.

If any of the kids asks what Lady Sorshen does to the Grey Maidens that she singles out and escorts up to her bedroom to play with and eventually kills them when she gets bored with them simply answer "probably just some kind of nasty torture."

One of the Grey Maidens (their commanding officer) ahs recently suffered a bad breakup with "Lady Sorshen" and is taking it very badly. Again, if you avoid too many details it should be fine. "She was being nice to me and then I realised she was using magic to make me like her too. That really upset me." That's about as far as you need to take that one. No need for further details.

So overall it should be fine to run. Just skim over a few of the details (which are kept fairly low key in the module anyway).

One of my favorite characters to DM was my friend Ian made a Goblin Paladin of Iomadae The character, Sir Boogoo Raven-Blade, was such a hilarious clash of race and class that melded into a beautiful character who retired at level 19.

Amusingly I recall an adventure in which a priest of Desna preached to a group of goblin prisoners who all decided to begin worshipping Desna the Destroyer! What? What are you thinking? I know, I know. well for Desna to be as impressive as the priest said, and to make such a long lasting impression on the goblins, then Desna had to be pretty powerful and, as far as a goblin is concerned, there's nothing more powerful than destroying stuff.

And thus the cult of Desna the Destroyer was born.

The characters wake up in an asylum with no memory of how they got there and only hazy recollections of who they are. This kind of start requires a fair amount of trust of the GM and of the Adventure Path. You can still create a character with a complete backstory, but know that some things happened in your character's past that are beyond his or her control.

While I'm going to encourage my players to not all try to play The Nameless One from Planescape Torment I won't mind the occassional jokes about "updating my journal."

Ah Night of the Hunter, a true and oft overlooked classic.

There's essentially two axes of progression

Axe of progression: wot a barbarian uses to leevull up wiv. Two axes of progression meens levulling two times as fast. Wun in each 'and!

A pair of gloves with mouths on the palms of them? How long 'til someone in Pathfinder says "talk to the hand 'cause the glove ain't listening"?

I was shocked to hear that exiting the EU requires that any agreements between the exiting country and the EU be ratified by unanimous agreement of all the remaining EU members.

Yeah, this could take a couple of weeks.

Typical Eu bureaucracy there I'm afraid :(.

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

I've been to Gibraltar; it's just a tiny little spire of a place, with special monkeys and tourist facilities and some nice caves (that nonetheless don't hold a candle to Carlsbad Caverns); what am I missing that would make Spain consider it worth shearing the EU for?

It's a superb strategic location.

Turn the question around. Why hasn't the UK given Gibraltar back to Spain? Because the UK aren't idiots.

Ironically the last few times the Spanish asked us to give them back Gibraltar we were quite willing to but then the Gibraltan population desperately begged us to let them be British. Well, okay, not necessarily begged. They certainly put up such stiff opposition that we simply had to let them remain a foreign colony. I am not proud of our foreign colonies. I'm glad we've given most of them back.

Personally (and somewhat jokingly), I'm wondering whether Canada would accept the UK as a new province.

But didn't you know? Canada is a part of Britain :P.

Okay, okay, okay, not the same Canada you're thinking of. You know how in Ireland there's this lovely little old village called Hollywood? Well it turns out that over here in Hampshire, down on the south coast, we have this tiny little village that's been around for centuries that just happens to be called Canada.....

Click the link and scroll down just a little if you'd like to read for yourself.

Shattered Star: It's like the Rod of Seven Parts but for Pathfinder.

"Throw a crowbar through a window." At one point a summoner's eidolon decided to use a crowbar to break a window by ... throwing the crowbar through the window despite being within arm's reach of aforementioned window. It then clambered through the broken window to retrieve the crowbar then climbed outside again. It could have just smashed the window with the crowbar without letting go of it.

This was all superfluous as we only needed to knock on the door or go 'round to another window to see if anyone was in. The manoeuvre was so stupid that it's kind of gone down in history. If you're going to break into somewhere at least make sure there's nobody home first. Especially if you don't actually need to break into it.

"Wicked wizard of the pit!" This one's pretty legendary. At one point our party came across a gang of evil cultists in an adjacent chamber. One of the cultists was a wizard who summoned a gnawing pit right in the doorway between the two rooms. What followed was a long protracted ranged battle with an exchange of fireballs and missile weapons across the pit as our party fighter clambered out of the pit (in Diehard Mode, I'm so glad I took that feat). Eventually once the fireballs had died down the wicked wizard of the pit (we didn't even know his name at the time) sucked all of the air out of the room on our side of the pit. Our own wizard succumbed to a feeblemind spell. The fight ended with our oracle and fighter dashing to safety, barely escaping as the two main villains closed in, and jamming & barricading the entrance behind us so they could not escape.

Since then that encounter has always been a benchmark for anything seriously lethal or seriously inconvenient which forces us to tackle things in a far from optimal manner. We eventually tracked that wizard down and had our revenge. It was a very satisfying revenge encounter but far less memorable than our original meeting.

"I want to listen to see if I can hear footprints." Yes a player actually said this. They got teased for years. You can't hear footprints. You can hear footsteps.

Hmm. Hasn't already been done?

Can I say the The True Game trilogy by Terri S Shepper? That would certainly make for an interesting visual approach with characters being assigned classes within the game (which is formal and even more complicated than chess). The later developments change things up just enough to keep plot twists and audiences guessing.

Plus the chapter where Peter (as a Shapeshifter) does battle with the Shapeshifter Castle (by using another power to cause it to lash out at itself and tear itself to pieces) would practically be a season finale on it's own.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True_Game

So it's pronounced "JAM-ees juh-COBS", right?

#Paizonamingdisasters

Surely it's pronounced Jam-ezz... Or possibly Jams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huSP7PtctC4

My favorite from the past is ixitxachitl

How can you not love aquatic, intelligent, vampiric rays

Ik si (as in sit) cha chi tull

That's about as close as any of us ever managed back when we were running Night Below. when you come up against a name like that you just have to break it down then put it back together again.

*Demon Lord, Kostchtchie - Most of the demons in Pathfinder are unpronounceable.

It's pronounced Cosh Eye. Koschei the Deathless is a character from Russian mythology & folklore. For some reason one of the Demonlords in the original Fiend Folio (AD&D's 2nd ever monster manual) was called Koschei. His writeup made it fairly evident that he was supposed to be Koschei the Deathless.

Evidently Paizo's authors might have felt the need to change the spelling to distance their version somewhat as the original demon wasn't exactly the most faithful representation of the character ever.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koschei

Tell me: why would a pacifist join the Pathfinder Society? Why would the Pathfinder Society accept a pacifist?

Ironically one of my PFS characters is a pacifist by natural selection rather than temperament. They're a bookish mousey scholar who many players have praised for being really useful in scenarios but who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. The character accepts this and does what they can (buffs, debuffs, condition removal etc) but generally avoids direct physical conflict because they are very fragile.

Unrelated to my above post:

I once played a Dwarf from "another world." Clearly everyone he encountered was trying to trick him - speaking in made up languages and pretending they expected him to understand them and respond in kind. Well he would not fall for this nonsense! In fact, he refused to speak to anyone unless they could address him in a language he recognised from his homeland. Most of the time people thought him to be mute.

This proved to be quite amusing as he was also a travelling smith. He would trade with facial expressions and sign language. Numbers were fun. They often involved scratching tallies in the dirt with a spare crossbow bolt or something similar. He became quite popular for his creative use of various forms of non verbal communication.

Not something I'd recommend people do often 'though. It can be quite draining creatively.

"Armour makes you harder to hit."

No it doesn't. Armour makes you harder to hurt. Armour should reduce damage. Not reduce the chance of taking damage at all in some all or nothing roll. Unfortunately it's so ingrained into the system that rejigging it would involve changing so many other things (like attack bonuses) that it would prove a plain nightmare.

As a system it works.

As a concept it's simply aberrant.

I'd say the upcoming Strange Aeons adventure path would be the perfect fit. Paizo have kindly given us a book full of strange mystical classes. After Hell's Rebels is out of the way we'll have a mysterious madness inducing AP, hopefully with a dose of investigation too.

So we get a book full of new classes. We get about six months to try them out, get used to them. And then we get an Adventure Path to play them in after an initial adjustment period.

Okay, it looks like a spoiler tag was added to the title. Thank you to whomever did that! Now, back to the question in the OP:

** spoiler omitted **

What do you mean if there's multiple dwarf pc's? It's the Giantslayer adventure path. If the players know what's good for them they'll all be wanting to play dwarfs and gnomes in this one.

:D

Having finally managed to get 'round to reading the rest of the book I, too, have some problems with the battle. Now it's not the usual "how did an orcish hoarde sneak up on the town unobserved". That's been discussed to death by now. Now. It's another set of problems altogether. What makes this more irksome is that the rest of the book is rather well written. Unfortunately the middle of the adventure seems to go into some kind of rule of cool computer game cutscene mode with things being forced down a very linear path.

Basically the entireity of part 2 is problematic for all the wrong reasons. Good reasons would be encounter difficulty, balance, things like that. The impression I'm getting is that the best way to run this section is to do it too quickly for players to question why things just don't make sense. And why should they make sense? It's a battle. It's chaotic. There's orcs running around trying to destroy things. That's all fine but these problems are pretty dire at times.

Problem 1: The heroes probably rest at the Rumblehouse. When the town is attacked the civilians gather at the Longhouse. The pc's are assumed to rush to the Longhouse. What if they don't want to go there? What if they want to rush to the walls or something? So imagine this situation. Kurst Grath meets the pcs at the Rumblehouse and tells them to start lighting this series of ebacons which will essentially lead them back towards the Longhouse. The adventure assumes they somehow get to the Longhouse (I'm going to assume the rush of the crowd seeps them along and they end up there otherwsie the entireity of the second chapter simply doesn't make sense). The series of beacons are written in such an order that they are clearly intended to be played from the Longhouse towards the Rumblehouse.

2: The pcs get to the Inner Gates Beacon (K). Kurst and a group of guards turns up and tells them "we're going to fight the giant outside town". Then they rush off to do just that. The problem here is that Kurst and his guards have to go through the Inner Quarter and then the Outer Quarter to get through the town gates. It's not as if they're going to be lowered down the walls in a basket on the end of a rope or anything. This problem ties in to quite a few of the following ones.

3: The pcs arrive at the Inner Quarter to find it in chaos. Orcs have flodded into the area and are now devastating the place. But Kurst Grath and his soldiers just came through here. The pcs are probably quite capable of moving at the same speed so where did Grath and his soldiers go? Let's assume that the soldiers were on horseback and raced through without stopping to fight any of the orcs but then how did the orcs just let them go through? Obviously a lot of mounted soldiers is more hassle than most small bands of orcish looters want to deal with so they just got out of the way but then ......

4: The portcullis is down. So the portcullis is down and the orcs got in. Maybe some swarmed over the walls? Logically the most obvious solution is as follows: The orcs forced their way in before the guards could react to lower the portcullis in time. Then Kurst and his guards had to ride through before the portcullis came down otherwise they would not have made it beyond the city walls. After this the orcs stormed the towers and slew the guards who lowered the portcullis because those guards aren't around to help out with the fighting. This flow of logic is not a problem unless any of the pcs are capable of travelling at the same speed. If that were the case then they'd have to witness this series of events without having any opportunity to affect them. Scene setting can always be good anyway.

5: The orcs are trying to break down the portcullis to get into the inner quarter. But they've already done this. This has to be a dissorganised second wave or something. But didn't Kurst and his soldiers run slap bang into the middle of this group of orcs on their way out to harass the giant? Somehow they completely avoided each other. Best put some dead orcs and soldiers outside the gates. Maybe even have one or two of this new wave of orcs brandishing trophies to make the players suspect maybe Kurst and his men didn't make it out the main gates after all?

6: After defeating the orcs at the gate the pcs must leave town to attack the orcish trebuchet. Why do they have to do this? Why? Why can't any of the other defenders of the town take on this task? Who tells them to do this? The only reason this encounter seems to exist is to get the pcs out of the way while the giant is moved into position. It feels very artificial. Clunky. "You must do this to unlock the next cutscene". This is all fine with players who are willing to be corralled but some players obstinately want to be in control of where their characters go and what they do. The nerve of some people!

Personally I think it's a real shame that I've run into all these hurdles because many other parts of the book (especially that paragraph in Kurst's entry about letting events shape his development - something I encourage in players anyway but it's nice to see an author including this possibility and pointing it out) are really well written. I like each of the individual elements of the battle but when you take a step back and put it all together suddenly it seems to be full of holes and inconsistencies.

I appear to have a lot in common with your GM. As a Gm I've recently come a lot of characters and players exhibiting similar traits and it's started to rub me up the wrong way. A lot of players are overspecialising or (in a few rare cases) boring one trick ponies. I don't mind if a player does something that's effective. In fact I cheer them on. Well done them. They contributed well to a successful endeavour and everybody had fun. If it happens again that's also great. If it keeps happening and it's the same player every time then the other players don't get to do so much. Also if it's highly effective it can start to make me feel powerless as a gm. What can I do? It's just going to be the same one trick pony one size fits all solution to walk all over my carefully constructed encounter whatever I do. This can feel a lot worse if I'm running a published scenario, module or even a campaign (I'll have a lot more freedom if I'm running something I made up myself).

When such a player brings a new character to the table there's this horrible sense of apprehension. "Great," I'll think, "what horribly broken rediculously overpowered rules exploit are they going to pull out of nowhere this time?" That is probably exactly what your gm feels every time you come up with a new character. To you the character's new. It's great. It's this wonderful new creation you want to play with but to your gm it's another in a long line of problems that he's just going to have to deal with. He doesn't even know the details yet but he knows he's going to hate it. It won't matter if your character has serious flaws and weaknesses if they never come up. Let's take the (problem) example of the much hated Synthesist Summoner. One particular player I know likes to brag that "it's not overpowered because once you get up to about 10th level you can just hit it with a Banish spell and it's gone." He completely ignores how irrelevant such an argument is for those first 9 levels. Sure, there's sleep spells and stuff like that but dealing with such a vastly powerful single dimensional character with a specially tailored encounter that isn't going to be much fun for the rest of the players will not be much fun for the gm either. Do you really want to play in a campaign where every hostile group of npcs has a scroll or wand of banishment just because they know there's one Synthesist Summoner out there who's a real threat? That might not fit the tone of the campaign - the style of game that the gm wants to run.

Now that I've described the problem let's look at a possible solution. I don't mind specialised characters. I do mind over-specialised ones. The kind who are obsessed with killing all the opposition before round 3. Preferably before round 2. As a gm I like to play with my toys as well. If all my monsters get killed before they ever get a turn in virtually every single encounter for sessions on end I'm going to get frustrated. I'm not playing them badly. I just don't get to play. I'd like to take part in a manner that doesn't just boil down to adding up damage and scrubbing monsters off the initiative order before praising players on boring me stiff. I'd like me monsters to hit back.

Let's use some completely made up numbers here. Let's pretend your character is 80% optimised. To my mind, as a gm, that's highly unrealistic. Such an individual should be a very rare breed. Practically incapable of functioning as a survivable individual without serious care and assistance. They should not be the bread and butter of average adventure party members. when all such characters are hyper-specialised it begins to break immersion and I feel like I'm not running the game any more. I'm just watching as a passive audience. I want the heroes to be capable of doing great things but I also want them to be challenged. Want them to feel as if they've earned the rewards of their labours. If they are not challenged then I do not feel they have earned their rewards.

So let's take that (made up number) 80% specialisation and try toning it down to 60% (another made up number). There's nothing wrong with having a specialised character. Just don't overdo it to the point where it might begin to spoil other people's fun.

Another thing I would like to say is make sure the character fits. If your GM wants to run a game about gnomes full of gnomish culture and stuff don't come in saying "well I want to play a (insert name of very un-gnomish thing here - let's say a half elf or hippogriff)." It's fine if one or two players does that but the gm wants most of the characters to be gnomes. If he's already got the hump about the kind of character you're likely to play then make an effort to make it fit into the existing game world setting. He's more likely to accept a powerful optimised character if it fits. It's when people start making excuses to shoe-horn in their latest powerbuild regardless of the actual kind of games being played that I, as a Gm, become uncomfortable and grumpy. If I want to run the Giantslayer advanture path as an all dwarf party (wth a few gnomes for the more sneaky and spellcaster roles) then I'm not going to be happy if three quarters of the players turn up and announce they all want to play half orcs. They clearly want to play a different game to the one that I want to run. I could run a game for half orcs. I totally could, but I'd been preparing notes for complex encounters designed to challenge the dwarven racial hatred of greenskins and make themr econsider their beliefs. Now I need to find ways of making half orcs face up to their orcish past, the reputations they'll have. People shunning them and treating them badly. It's not what I prepared for. And it's players disrespecting my wish as a gm to run a particular kind of game.

So in short, talk to your gm. Tone down the specialisation a bit. Don't try to persuade him that certain weakness or shortcomings will balance it out. If you do intend to have such weaknesses then suggest ways in which they can be used. Give the gm some ideas and please try to avoid being a one trick pony. He's going to hate that.

It is just a one time thing. You are not wrong.

When it's a continuity or maintenance thing it's totally fine to remind another player or the gm. As long as it's not malicious. I can see how some players would grumble that it's disrupting the flow of the game with clunky admin (they probably just wanted to time blip the entire journey to get to whatever they were planning on doing at the other end of it).

As a gm I'd rather have a player remind me of a disease at the start of a journey than, halfway through a fight go "oh, mate, you need to do 17 days of disease saves now which I totally forgot about and, since it's a con drain one, they might actually get harder if ytou fail some. We really should have done this before rolling for initiative five rounds ago..."

Sometimes necessary admin can be clunky but there's a few things that should not be glossed over when they involve life and limb. If it's just accounting for who's carrying the food or something then that's fine but when a character's health is involved I tend to not want to gloss over anything.

What I want,

what I have really wanted for a long time is a cavalier archetype that simply swaps out the horse for a ... Squire. You know. A follower/npc who'd level similar to an animal companion but without the whole animal part. Some poor overburdened youngster to carry weapons and spare armour parts. That sort of thing.

Nobody seems to want to create such an archetype 'though :(.

This of course only applies to oracle revelations that create physical armor. Not all armor revelations do, as you so note, just like it wouldn't apply to the mage armor spell.

I would never claim that Magic Vestment could target Spirit Shield. However, since Mage Armour can target non magical garments that do not need to be a suit of armour it's quite understandable that (at the gm's discretion), Magic Vestment can target the garments worn while Spirit Shield is active. Since Spirit Shield if an Armour bonus and Magic Vestment is an Enhancement bonus to the Armour bonus ..... you can see how it could go either way.

Magic Vestment

An outfit of regular clothing counts as armour that grants no AC bonus for the purpose of this spell.

Actually that seems pretty cut and dried to me. One is an armour bonus being provided to the character. Another is an enhancement bonus to the character's armour bonus. These two are different bonus types. You can argue about bonus types and item slots all you like as every group is likely to come to their own consensus. It's not about whether the bonus types can stack. it's about if the magic vestment spell can be applied at all in the first place. Perhaps the question should not be whether the magic vestment spell can be applied but what it would be applied to.

If the oracle's armour revelation clearly creates physical protection of a more tangible nature then it's another matter entirely.

To be totally honest one of the most amusing things I've seen in Pathfinder was a villain casting and unnatural lust on one party member and unnatural loathing on another. It wasn't quite Benny Hill territory but it was getting there :).