DivergentZen's page

I already emailed about this, but it also seems like I should post to this forum.

Please cancel my AP subscription.

Thanks.

As fan of the old Phantasy Star series and Lovecraft, I've been looking forward to this AP since I first heard about it. It's going to be the first PF AP I've ever DMed, so I'd appreciate some feedback on this.

1. Eventually providing a fortunate/unfortunate PC with fast healing in radioactive areas.

2. Given what the AP reveals about Unity, I want to provide some way to get the machine race thriving on The Horse involved. The Distant Worlds setting explains they have a fascination with Divine Spellcasting. Possibly bring one of those robots back to Golarion.

3. Haven't seen it in the AP, yet, but intelligent robots should have the ability to cast arcane spells. Might be funny to have a Star Wars mouse droid equivalent break out a Color Spray on an unexpecting party.

4. Drop a vague hint that it wasn't the desperate actions of the Divinity's crew that allowed the ship to escape the Dominion of the Black, but was Aroden intervening to save the ship and send it to Golarion. Would that cause any major conflicts with the existing lore?

5. As circumstances allow, bring a PC back from the dead via "renegade nanites," but afflict them with some form of madness, as laid out in the rule books.

6. Have an easter egg area discoverable by the PCs that functions as a failed robot prototype museum and includes some suspiciously familiar robots that attack the PCs. Think the killer robot from Disney's The Black Hole or the one from Lost in Space.

I made a knowledge (planes) check (once I could see it) high enough to ID it and get one question. The DM told me/the table what it was and we were all like, wth is that?

I think I asked what its weaknesses were in a panic and the DM told me it didn't have any.

By clue, I meant something like a short creepy poem or maybe some ornamentation on the door frame hinting at what lies within and what it does. Heck, the BBEG could pass along hint for its own agenda.

You have to understand, new players don't always have the metagame knowledge veteran players have. You tell me the scenario is called House of the Red Dragon and I'll have an idea what I might need. I have a general understanding of the threats that might pose. It really does no good when my character has more knowledge about a monster than I do. He knew what it was and I didn't.

Someone mentioned how the seasonal storyline was a hint, but we tend to play these scenarios in a kind of random fashion depending on which plauers and which characters are able to show up and play. I've run maybe a couple dozen scenarios and only have the vaguest idea of the overarching plot.

I was running the sorceror (sorc 5/oracle 1) and will say that was a terrible encounter all around. I'm as conflicted about it as the DM. I knew pretty much by round 2 it was going to be a TPK. And strictly by the rules it should have been. That said, I'll shade in some of the details as to how things went so wrong.

First, I knew something was up as soon as we encountered the area in question. I stopped the party and suggested we send the rogue ahead to spy out the area. I casted vanish on the rogue and he went ahead. He found the monster, but the monster made a successful perception check to locate him when he tried to sneak back to us. (I know that doesn't sound right, wait...).

The rogue gets attacked and basically one shotted. The monster then immediately drops darkness. The dwarf cleric decides the best way to get to our dying party member is to use create pit to slip beneath the gate rather than attempting tbe other route through the darkness.

I've only been playing PF for about a year and have managed to deal with darkness with invisibity and area spells. I also did a mental check before we left Absalom as to our DV character count. I thought that with both the Barb and cleric having DV we were good. Even if I can't see, I can support them.

So before the barb goes swinging beneath the gate and through tbe pit, I cast vanish on him, thinking he now has a significant advantage over whatever we are fighting. I was wrong. Beford the Barb can charge, the DM reads that the monster can see invis. Mistakes happen, and I've no problem with that, but it did affect how we positioned ourselves initially.

I somehow made it through the pit to assist the rest of the party in the fight on the other side before the pit disappeared. But like the DM indicated, the Barb, for RP reasons, stuck with his magic great sword instead of that certain cold iron weapon we liberated earlier that our cleric fortunately decided to tote.

The barb went into a rage, but had some supersition ability that handicapped our clerics ability (and mine) to heal him. The dice turned on us pretty hard, too, and got hot for the DM, not just the D20s, but the damage dice. The monster was hitting the barb like a truck.

I tried casting glitterdust (twice, to blind), grease, burning hands, and even a suicidal create pit when the barb dropped. The monster made every save and I failed tbe SR check. I have DC17 for lvl 2 spells, so that was like 4 or 5 coin tosses that didn't fall my way. The cleric exhausted his healing channels and spells keeping the barb up. The rogue was brought to pksitive hp, but literally could not stand without provoking certain death. I think our other party member was trying to help him, but kept got cut to ribbons by AOOs and reach weapon.

By the time I switched to casting blind clw spells on a newly revived and exhausted barb, the DM had the monster teleport away. None of us considered retreat an option at that point, because the creature TELEPORTED. My experience with Bearded Devils was this monster could follow us wherever.

I dug out a scroll of obscuring mist while the barb got healed. I was advised not to use the scroll when the monster returned a round later. And granted, had the monster been doing sneak attack damage it would have made more sense. Again, we didn't think we could just run away and SWIM back the way we came unmolested.

The monster ported back to a place that kind of cut off our retreat had we made one. The barb armed himself with the CI weapon and ended the battle. Had the monster brought back a friend or the BBEG made a move (why wouldn't they?), we would have been dead.

The last encounter was trivial compared to this one, despite how beat up we were.

All of this said, I think some issues exist with the darkness mechanic in the game and with the CR of that particular monster. The player's w/o DV felt like they were being slaughtered because they didn't have the foresight to prep for a magical super assassin they didn't even know existed until that adventure. And most, if not all the counters to DV we've used so far could have been dispelled by the monster that can both dispell and drop darkness at will.

That's also the second time in as many sessions a charactet's seemingly harmless RP decisions significantly hurt the party.

I didn't even realize DV was a lvl 2 spell, myself, ratherless that I could buy a potion of it. I intend to pick up something to deal with darkness more effectively at my next level.

So, the DM made the best of a bad situation and I paid some small penance for it after getting poisoned. I lost the PP I gained to restore an ability stat.

That scenario has issues beyond just this encounter. Paizo should really revisit it (and that monster). Perhaps even the light/darkness mechanic in general. It really makes playing a mid to low level character without DV feel like a liability. Too often, the racial choice feels like a life and death decision.

As far as the adventure, even a small written clue about the monster's existence, specifically, would either give someone in-game or meta-game knowledge so they can make some prep. At least then it wouldn't feel so cheap to new people when they walk into inevitable death.

Could someone please clarify this for me. I have a Fighter 2/Rogue 2 character with the Two Weapon Fighting Feat and I am dual wielding short swords. So, can I draw both of my short swords in a single move action or must I take a move action per short sword?

In Skull and Shackles right at the start where a particularly nasty NPC demands the party get to work, my Hobgoblin fighters chimes in with the following:

"Sure, but answer something for me first. When your mother was nursing you as a babe and would hold the wrong end to her teet was it because she was that stupid or were you just that ugly?"

Nearly resulted in a TPK and my character got whipped to just a couple hp with lethal damage. Was fun though.

He does not take the penalty if he chooses to forego the extra attack from wielding the second weapon.

And when he's only allowed to make a single attack, e.g., after taking a move action?

I'm not clear on this and I apologize if its been brought up a million times or is clearly indicated some where in the rules.

A character wielding two weapons, both light and with the TWF feat (or any other combo), takes a -2 to hit with each weapon. If the same character takes a move action, greater than a 5 ft step, the character can only make a single attack.

That said, if the character can only make a single attack, despite having two weapons, does the character still incur the -2 to hit for that single attack?

Slightly different scenario, the same character does not move but only chooses to make a single attack in a round. Does the penalty apply?

If the penalties do apply in these situations, it strikes me as a little unfair. Equipping a shield or holding an item in one's offhand does not incur a two weapon penalty unless you attempt to attack with whatever is on the offhand. It also strikes me as odd that wielding two weapons would not only fail to gain you an extra attack after moving, but would still penalize you for making a single attack with one weapon.

I mean, do I have to specify to the DM that I'm not wielding a weapon in my offhand, just holding onto it, until I'm able and willing to make a FRA, so I can avoid the penalty?

My gaming group is preparing to run Skull and Shackles and we're working on our characters. I'm considering running a Fighter (Corsair)/Rogue (Thug), but the Corsair's Armored Pirate ability has me confused.

First, it replaces the Fighter's Armor Training 1 at 3rd level to allow you to take a 0 penalty for Swim and Acrobatics checks while wearing light armor. That's fine.

But at 7th level, you're supposed to be able to take a 0 penalty for Swim and Acrobatics checks while wearing Medium armor. And 11th is heavy armor. But, the Acrobatics skill doesn't work in Medium and Heavy armors. Except for swimming, it kind of makes the Armored Pirate ability moot.

Also, Armor Training 1 provides the ability to use your full movement speed when wearing medium armor. If you take that and the proceeding armor training skills away for Armored Pirate, you end up with the absurd result of a pirate in chain mail only able to move 20' on the deck of a ship, but able to swim like a fish when knocked overboard.

So, is this a mistake in the Pirates of the Inner Sea Player's Companion Guide? I liked the archetype until I started considering the mechanics of this ability. I might just be better off with a vanilla fighter if the Armored Pirate ability is written as intended.

Thanks.

All these new hybrid classes, but no Ranger/Cleric? Really? They were one of the old ADD2e staples!

I built and ran the Brawler, but some of the ambiguity around the class hurt my build.

First, I was not aware the Brawler could use Feats that required Fighter or Monk levels. Second, like our DM explained, I was unclear if I could use improved two weapon fighting with Brawler's fury. Third, I assumed the Combat Maneuvers per day limit referred to using the ability and not the number of feats, e.g., at lvl 6 being able to activate 6 feats in a day versus just 3. Fourth, I took the Combat Maneuvers ability to be the central focus of the class, when it's really more focused on being a lightly armored fighter with unarmed attacks. And fifth, I would have greatly benefitted from either a tailored spreadsheet breaking down all the feats I can use or Slacker's uncanny knowledge of them.

With all that said, the Brawler is basically a fighter with a little more flavor. I rolled an elf and went dex-based. I had a decent AC and the ability to use a composite long bow. But my con was neutral. If I made a new brawler, I'd go STR-based and would splash a level of cleric or fighter so I could wear heavier armor. Armor doesn't really affect a Braer's abilities and you will need the AC without high dex.

Despite my build and its issues, I feel like the Brawler could use some tweaking. Even though the class offers some brief moments of extraordinary versatility, a fighter would bring more damage and defense to any given fight. And this feeds into my biggest complaint about the class--economy of action.

You can't rely on combat maneuvers to be a quick counter to an enemy unless you are already in position. And using two feats puts you behind a round. This changes at 10th level when activating one feat is a swift action. Considering the limited number of times you can activate a feat in a day, I think activating a single feat should always be a swift action with two requiring a move action and three a standard action.

Edit: I meant martial maneuvers, not combat maneuvers.

I have a totally new character. I just got enough PP to afford a CLW wand. But with my clothing (explorers outfit), backpack, weapons (dagger, short spear, light cross bow w/ 20 bolts), and waterskin/rations I'm just about at or past medium encumbrance. I guess I should save up for a pouch next, but with a little less than 500 GP it might be a while.

Starting with a STR of 7, even on a cloth caster, are you tracking encumbrance at all? Seriously, I'm new to PFS and running an 8 STR Sorcerer and my weight allowance is a real issue for me.