Bengaltiger's page

i'd like to see two major things:
Mech combat and eldritch horror meshed with sci fi
(not together mind you, just as options)

Great Name Generator.
"One Generator to rule them all, One Generator to find them.
One Generator to bring them all and in the Darkness Bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows Lie."

Bengaltiger wrote:

As a developer, Is it possible to write encounters that can compensate for a party made around a theme that can punch at a higher CR level vs the foes you would expect to find in this path?

Also, can you do that and still be fair to the parties that are not necessarily built to a Theme?
We all had a lot of fun in COT, but given my experience in COT, I am worried.

I mostly answered this in a post a few replies upthread, but yeah...

The combination of having years of experience with the Pathfinder RPG (as opposed to days, if that) and the fact that we're building the AP to be ABOUT demon slaying (Council of Thieves was not ABOUT devil slaying) means that we'll be going into that adventure knowing the PCs are going to be specializing in demon slaying. And we intend to give those demon slayers a LOT to do.

THAT ALL SAID...

I'm wondering if, since you really enjoyed Council of Thieves and had a fun time with it... is the fact that your group did so well at killing devils a bad thing? Is it a bad thing that you had fun? I'm not so sure it is.

Thanks James. I appreciate your Candor.

I wa talking to some friends about Wrath of the Righteous, and while everyone was excited by the idea, there was some reservations. Those reservations were based upon their experiences with Council of Thieves. When Council of Thieves came out the players very naturally anticipated a fair number of diabolical foes, and made their characters around that assumption. Consequently when devils (or other evil outsiders) showed up they were ready to smack down on them. The group found the AP to be fun but light on challenge.

I did not participate in the campaign but I know and have played with these folks. They're not particularly inclined to be munchkins, but they will pick suitable classes, feats, and other character choices to play into the campaign theme, especially guided by the Player's guide. Not to cheat, but just to be logical and conform to the theme. Their consensus was that the group was hitting above the average CR for their APL, not due to anything more than adhering to the theme.

So when we talked about Wrath of the Righteous the concern was that we'll have a paladin, an inquisitor, a ranger with evil outsider as a favored enemy and companion bond, and maybe a cleric-and between all the smiting, and shared bonuses that they're going to be ahead to the APL/CR. Again, not that anyone would game the system, but that the synergistic character choices would all add up to boost them above a standard CR because they anticipated the nature of the enemies.

I know you like an actual question, so pardon the brief feedback...

How as a developer do you compensate for this? Or, do you just design straight by the expected APL?

"Wrath of the Righteous"

I apologize if this is in the FAQ already, but I can not find it anywhere. Can I get a ruling on this?

Thanks people. This was just for fun.
every now and then I get inspired.

My vote went to Jim Groves

I like this one. The map is extremely good and the Backstory is solid. I really enjoyed the Horrow deck so a tie in to that is cool.
This makes me want to stick it into a campaign right now. there is always a place for a good encounter in a big city.

Good Job!
This gets my vote.

Well I have greatly enjoyed the entries this year.

Good Luck everyone.

The Skintaker,the Ossuary Golem, The Chymick, and the Marrow Worm

This is Awesome!

I am sorry I did not get this back in time to count, but I like the background and the ID Tie in. To be honest, I.D.'s are not my favorite monster. they are just hard to work into a campaign. This writeup makes an I.D. storyline interesting and the story practically writes itlself.
It totally disgusts me and makes me sympathetic at the same time.
I am not good at Constructive Critisism, but here goes.
It seems a little light on details. I would have liked a mention of whether this is a template monster (Probably), and whether it regenerated or just had fast healing when it healed itself. I love creatures with background, and this one has a great one, but a mention of why the I.D.s actually need these monsters to do infiltration work might be nice, as I <think> the ID's already can do that stuff. of course, ID's need minions to do thier dirty work without actually endangering the ID's themselves, and these monsters can be mass produced. <ICK>

Gross, Shapechanging Monsters are a dime a dozen, but this monster has a cool tie in, and a simpathetic bone to challenge the morals of a party. "No! please don't kill me! I am really the barmaid you met last week. Please help me!"
Killing bad monsters is Ho Hum. this one also chalenges a party Moraly.. I really like this monster. Without this monster, the ID is just another monster.
This monster makes them masterminds.

good Job

Paladins are Religious Champions. End of story.

As such, they should be able to be Religious Champions of any given set of ideologies. If a God can embue a Cleric with the ability to cast Divine spells and do that while demanding that the cleric adhere to the ideologies of a given faih (no matter what alignment that faith expouses), then that same God can embue a Champion with special gifts in the same vein.

Again... go read A PLETHORA OF PALADINS from Dragon 106. Great article.

And if you do not believe a very cool, flavorful, and interesting Champion of True Neutrality can be written... you have not read the background on the Paramander/Paramandyr.

:-)

You are right, I have not read that issue. thanks.

My Paladin Ideas.

Nothing really wild here but here goes.

1) I see paladins of all verieties following a strict code, so keep the Lawful aspect, just let them be good or evil. No neutral paladins, as I see paladins as being strict in their ideology.
2) make thier aura good or evil depending on thier alignment.
3) give them some options other than turn undead. some ideas are
a) Let them channel Holy power into thier wieapon. This should not take the place of thesmite, but be less damage over more rounds. an idea would be to do your charisma in holy (or unholy) damage for a number of rounds.
b) perhaps they can make their weapons holy as the weapon ability for a while.
c) Let them summon help from thier deity. Hellhounds or some such and Archons maybe.
d) Give thier aura different effects other than fear immunity. Effects such as allies within 30' effected like a bless, or getting a +2 Morale bonus on Damage, or a bonus to hit.
e)Perhaps they can cast magic circle vs evil/good.
f) Maybe its just casting Protection vs evil
g) Let them get access to one domain from thier deity.
h) give them the Fighters Weapon specialization with thier dieties weapon.

anyway, these are my ideas.
thanks

Tamago wrote:

My biggest paladin problem is that after 6th level, they get no new class abilities. There's no reason to stick with the class after that. <sarcasm>"I can cast Remove Disease one more time per week? Whoop-de-doo!"</sarcasm>

(yes, I know that they get spells, but they're not good enough and Paladins get too few for them to really be useful.)

Given the nice slew of class abilities Paizo is throwing out here, I'm hopeful that this will be addressed. . .

Rest assured, this is a concern that I will be addressing. That said, do you have any suggestions.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

You are right, this may be to sacred a cow, but I do not think LG dieties are the only ones to have Holy Warriors. I would just like to be able to throw a Blackguard-esque evil paladin at the party without having to take a prestige class. We have core rules for evil clerics, so why not evil palidins who are equally attuned to thier diety as a good palidin is?

I don't mean to be Anal about threads, but there is a Turn undead thread already started in the Combat section.
Perhaps posting there would keep like threads to a minimum.

Hey Deth_Jester.
Fancy meeting you here.
Well, to get right to my opinion, I do not like changing the xp chart from what it is in 3.5. The reason is simple. Backwards Compatibility. I know there are a host of reasons to change the XP chart, not the least of which is that I would like higher level PC's to stay around in a level a little longer than one major fight.
The thing is, there are way to many Prewritten adventures and AP's already on my shelf (and probably other peoples shelfs) to ask GM's with a shortage of time to have to change each one whole cloth.

Even the Fast xp chart in the alpha edition is way to different at high levels.

Level 20 in 3.5: 190,000 xp
190,000 xp in 3.alpha is somwhere between 12th and 13th level.

I do think that 3.0 & 3.5 levels characters to fast, but it is way to late to change that now, at least in my opinion. Keep the 3.0 xp chart, and just have a sidebar telling dms how to make the xp faster or slower to suit thier tast.

Weakened- When and if a creature is brought to or below 10% of its maximum hit points the creatures body begins to weaken and at that point is only able to do (1) standard or move action. This is due to the total damage done to the creature in question and this penalty can be removed by bringing the creature above 10%. If damage is enough that the creature goes from above 10% or more to death -1hp move straight to the rules on death.

Interesting Idea. I know several GM's that have similar house rules. As for myself, I do not like the extra bookkeeping an extra state causes me to have to do, either as a GM or a player.

Unconscious- This is when the creature is at 0hp and happens either threw damage that brings you to exactly 0 or threw the use of a heal check (stabilized) or any type of healing. The first healing magic (short of a heal spell) used no matter what strength brings the creature to an unconscious state (0hp). When at 0hp if able to the creature falls prone.

I Like this idea, and think it is an excellent addition to the rules.

Death- Once a creature reaches -1 hp, for all intensive purposes the creature is dead and if able, falls to the ground prone. When the creature’s hp reach -1 its body starts to shut down and soul begins to leave. This happens during the point of -1 and lasts until -9 hit points at which point the creature in question is still able to be saved but only during these 9 rounds. Once the creature reaches -10 hit points true death occurs at which point only magical means (raise dead, etc.) can be used to bring back the creature. This rule holds true unless otherwise stated (disintegrate).

With this rule it does not matter how many hit points you had prior to death for when death occurs you start at -1hps no matter what (a fighter with 21 hit points and a wizard with 2 hit points are caught in a fireball that does 28 hit points damage. The fighter fails his save and the wizard passes hers so the fighter takes full damage and the wizard...

I like this suggestion too. I would follow the above steps unless the PC was killed outright. If the hit that kills him would have dropped him below -10, then give him one round at deaths door only instead of 10. This gives the PC's some time to help, but would preserve the OMG factor for large amounts of damage.

The Coupe de Grace manuver would bypass this step automatically of course.

On the whole I like the new turn system. I will never again have to crack open a book every time I turn undead.

The problem I see cropping up in this thread several times is the area affect nuking ability it gives rebukers. My suggestion to handle this problem is to let good clerics spend a turn attempt to try and dispell the rebuke attempt.
example.
1) Good cleric is holding initiative, waiting on the evil cleric.
2) Evil cleric rebukes undead.
3) good cleric attempts to dispel the effect by turning undead.

I see several possible outcomes.
1) Both attempts work, cancelling out where they overlap.
2) The two affects are treated as a dispell attempt following the rules for dispell magic.
3) or they just cancel out automatically.

as far as the rest, I like the Cone AOE emanation from the Holy symbol, and I also like the idea of making Healing burst an alternate use of Turn undead.

It certainly can be interpreted the way Ki_Ryn interprets it. a couple of extra words to forstall the many Rules Lawyers out there is always a good thing.
Add the extra words please and keep the gms from having to have this discussion with a player. ;)

As a GM, I find Hitpoints easy to remove regardless of the level. Extra hitpoints at first level give the pc's a small comfort zone that means less and less the higher level you are.
At first level, a PC should feel good about fighting a pack of Goblins, and not spend the entire level acting scared of a fight because of single digit hit points.
A bad Dice night at first level can kill an entire party.

We currently play with the typical "max HP +con modifier" rule in place.
My impression right now of low level 4th ed is that you are a heroic level character even at first level, making it impossible to start out as "Just a Farmboy from the sticks." Starting out as a nobody and taking a character to high level "Hero of the Land" status is what makes the game fun for me. That being said, we will be trying out the different options, but right now I say give a few extra hitpoints because of race and background and keep the "max hp + con modifier" rule as the sidebar option.