Ok, so I want to ensure that I'm paying attention to all possible rules concerning how the rod of wonder size reduction effect works.
From what I can find, strength and dexterity don't actually change. The polymorph subschool seems to indicate that these are changed by actual wording within the spell, and as the rod of wonder includes no such language (and isn't even technically a polymorph effect, I guess), strength and dexterity remain what they were.
However, normal size modifiers do apply (ie, +4 to attack and AC, -4 to CMB and CMD, +12 to stealth, +6 to fly). Additionally, it seems like dexterity will be used for climb and swim, as the size is under tiny. Similarly, armor will also only apply half of its benefit to AC.
Am I missing anything here? Anything I'm mistaken on? Basically the idea is for a gnome character who goes out into a field every morning and shakes the rod at a tree until he becomes diminutive. I'll also have to figure out what color he is every day, but that sort of fits the character idea.
We would have been totally fine with either fighting it out or paying off with gear (had we thought those were options. We had actually been told to AVOID fighting so as to not lower the society's reputation in the city). Or, if we had known what a "favor" entails, even just paying with gold. We partly accepted that favor in the hopes it would be some interesting plot thing later that might come up, or even a penalty in a future scenario.
We DIDN'T think it would be a flat "lose your next prestige and fame." It honestly makes me hesitant to accept deals from now on, since they seem to have shifted from "this might be an interesting plot device later" to "lose stuff immediately just because."
Sorry, I know I sound bitter, but it really just came across as a big middle finger to everyone playing.
Encounter itself:
We were playing high tier with the 4 player adjustment, and there was only ever 1 swamper we met- a guy with a big cat. He very much was played as a speaker for the swamp, without a will of his own. The thought of beating him up for information therefore didn't seem to make much sense, since he seemed to have no idea of self. Everything was "we" and "the swamp demands..."
@GM ofAnything
We tried bartering items away in exchange, but were explicitly told that wasn't an option- is the scenario written otherwise?
@Bob Jonquet
I will definitely have everyone do that. It was a frustrating experience that seemed so counter-intuitive to what everyone else's pathfinder experience had been
So my group just finished playing #6-23: The Darkest Abduction, and pretty much everyone hated it. Aside from the classical issues of railroading and horrible plot coherence, there seemed to be an even bigger problem.
Spoiler:
It seems that the only way to avoid paying a ton of gold or losing prestige points is to attack a neutral, cooperative NPC. To me, attacking an NPC because you don't like the price they're asking for information seems to be an explicitly evil act. You know, like we aren't supposed to do. Apparently in this case, our options were to either A) be penalized or B) decide that the entire list of ideals of the pathfinder society should be sidelined. He was far from hostile towards us, and in fact seemed quite morally neutral as far as we could tell. Aside from that, "you owe us a favor" turning into "lose some prestige and fame" seems to be an absolutely dumb leap.
We refer to this where I play as a "Screw the PCs" scenario, and probably the worst many of us have seen. But going forward, it seems to suggest an even bigger problem.
This encounter could have best been resolved by needlessly attacking an NPC. Is this the takeaway we want here? Next time someone suggests taking a purely murder-hobo approach, I have no argument to give them. It seems that either this is purposefully designed to screw over players or that its designed to give this message.
I cannot think of a scenario that we've enjoyed less, and that is a quite extensive list to consider.
Hopefully it doesn't become law the way it currently is... I understand trying to prevent people from gaming the system, but it seems a blanket ruling this broad isn't the way to go about it.
Why not specify transmutation effects, in addition to effects that can result in death if left uncured? Or, if that isn't enough, specifically EXCLUDE things like negative levels and ability damage that have within them no real obstacle to ever playing that character again.
I suppose at this point that's just my two cents, but it seems to be a common opinion among both board posters and the gaming groups I attend.
So is this a complete departure from the guide, then? If so, that should be stated somewhere official unambiguously (like errata).
It seems like I've played with a number of characters who would now have to be "retired" before we even began our missions. I know I played with at least 2 people whose characters were still raising money to get rid of their last negative level from an earlier death.
They might as well start claiming that even a simple raise dead REALLY costs 24 PP (if your gm is nice and allows 2 standard restorations) or significantly more if they require a greater one.
I guess any low-mid low level ability drain effects are killers now.
I'd like to ask for a clarification to the above situation. In the Guide version 4.3 it seems to very specifically say that
"When playing your own character, all conditions
(including death) not resolved within the scenario
or module carry beyond the end of the adventure.
Likewise, any wealth spent or resources expended
during the course of the adventure are tracked and must
be recorded on the Chronicle sheet."
(It does specify that disease must be cured and does not carry over.)
This seems rather unambiguous, but reading the baleful polymorph thread confused me, as it seemed to indicate just the opposite- that all conditions not resolved within the scenario or module instantly kill your character.
Again, this seems directly contradictory to what the guide says, and is not found in the errata.
So is the guide wrong, and any condition left at the end means death?
Ok, I have a question about a specific issue I've encountered. I'm not sure if this is the place to post it, but here goes.
If I have a character that only takes 1 level of Oracle, my understanding is that he is then able to use spell-activation items (scrolls, wands) of the spells that are on the oracle class list, regardless of spell level, without a UMD check. In other words, even with only a single level of oracle he could use a wand of cure moderate wounds.
But what about spells that are not on the spell list normally, but are related to your mystery? Say I pick the battle mystery, which adds enlarge person at level 2. Can I use a wand of enlarge person at level 1, or does it get "added" to my spell list at level 2?
I realize this ended a few weeks ago, but it was funny to read this and have my character slowly described...
He's currently a sorc 5/ oracle 1 gnome illusionist. I have the sylvan archetype (I ride a lion), and have boon companion. My color spray DC is 19 (or 20, come to think of it...) and it's always funny to see various GM's say "Ok, he failed his save. But at this level he's only stunned for 1 round, right?"
