What's really odd to me is that Line of Effect and Cover are defined the same way. In fact, the definition of Line of Effect actually references the definition of Cover. So if I'm reading it right, that means it's impossible for something to have Cover and still be targetable, because by the same definition, that something would not have Line of Effect.
Honestly I have a hard time believing that any party will decide on their own to try to board the Empire of Bones. It's such a ludicrous idea that I doubt most groups will even consider it, let alone actually decide to do it without heavy GM intervention. I ran this with my group last week, and they had planned on going through the gate to get to the Stellar Degenerator, which is by far the most reasonable thing to do. Perhaps figure out how to use the weapon to destroy the Empire of Bones, or stick with the original plan and crash it into a star.
Even if they don't want to do that (I told them the Corpse Fleet had managed to get between them and the gate somehow, which already stretched the bounds of believability) then why would they think it's safe for them to try to board the capital ship? And if they do, why would they believe that the five of them could even pilot a ship larger than Absalom Station?
In the end, I had to railroad them into boarding the Empire of Bones. They hadn't even mentioned it as a possibility, and I told them that's where the adventure wanted them to go. It was awkward and very disappointing.
Except I used DropBox with HeroLab Classic to do exactly this, until Lone Wolf removed DropBox support just before they released their online-only model. So no, they won't be getting any more of my money.
Jason Keeley wrote:
Yeah, feel free to add a starship-scale monster! Those can be fun and can real highlight the strangeness of the Drift!
Thanks for the tip! Any suggestions as to what monster I can use? I was thinking about the Novaspawn from the Alien Archive, but I'm also considering maybe a bunch of smaller monsters (CR 4 or 5) instead. Not too many choices available yet though.
Is the Azlanti attack in Chapter 1 relevant to the plot, or is it just a random encounter? I suspect that my players will take it to mean that the Azlanti Empire is now interested, and somehow connected to the Stellar Degenerator plot. I'm thinking about replacing this with a monster-as-starship encounter instead, but I don't want to miss a key plot point later on by doing this.
Any chance Paizo is talking to Isaac Childres, the creator of Gloomhaven? It's currently the #1 game on Board Game Geek, and is an amazing dungeon crawler with long term legacy play. I've been playing it nearly every week for almost a year now, and I'm not even close to being bored with it.
I think Pathfinder would be a perfect fit for this game. A Pathfinder-flavored version would work great, using the Iconic characters. Any chance Paizo has contacted the creator to work something out?
I'm running Incident at Absalom Station right now, and we're running without xp. I'm going to level up the party at appropriate times in the story, but I'm not clear on when exactly those times are. The book provides some guidance, but it's non-specific.
They're supposed to level up to 2 some time while they're exploring the ship. But they never leave the ship, and I don't really like them just jumping up in level mid-exploration. Maybe after the ship and before the asteroid makes the most sense.
Are they supposed to be level 3 before the last encounter? I've heard some reports that it's pretty tough. It's a party of 5, and not 4, so maybe it won't be so bad? Should I bump them to 3 before the encounter? Or just let them fight through it at level 2 and then have them reach 3 at the end?
TigerDave (or anyone else who's done this with 5 players) how are you finding the balance for a 5-player party? I'm about to start it next week with a group of 5 very experienced tabletop players who are going to be fairly optimized. It's written for 4 players, but it's supposed to be fine as-is for 5 players, but I'm a little wary of that. Have you had to modify any encounters to suit?
As a non-creative DM, I hate when my players go talk to an NPC that I hadn't planned out, and I have to quickly come up with a name, description, and persona for that NPC on the spot. So, I often try to generate a list of NPC names ahead of time, and use them as necessary throughout the adventure. Perhaps we can compile a list here, so we can borrow from each other's ideas?
The idea is to provide a very simple NPC with as little or as much detail as you want, even if it's just a name and race. You might have a specific profession in mind, or it might just be an average everyday citizen whose non-description job isn't important to the story or character.
So, some examples to get started:
Jerel Mordhel, the Human shopkeeper. Young guy who had dreams of being a Starfinder but was forced to stay home when his father became ill.
Merilee Trinnic, the Ysoki starship mechanic with a bum leg that keeps her from traveling too much.
Lorgen Wathier, the Human politician who's becoming increasingly frustrated with the red tape he needs to wade through to help the people of his home planet.
Greta Koripsky, the Vesk mercenary with a love of knives.
Thorien Mel'Akin, the Lashunta doctor with a soft spot for children.
I ran the Goblin Pyros encounter this evening, where the party fought three goblin warriors and the warchanter. I had downloaded the goblin song audio, and decided to play it (loudly) on repeat until the warchanter died. This drove my players nuts, because they were already sick of it by the second time it looped. They really wanted to kill the warchanter to make it stop. As soon as he fell, I turned off the goblin song, which they heartily celebrated.
This was exactly the effect I was hoping for! I recommend doing this if you're running this AP. :)
I've just started a RotL campaign, and I'm thinking about combining these two NPCs into one character. She'll attempt to seduce one of the NPCs, either failing or getting caught, and then turn up dead in chapter two. Any foreseeable problems with this setup? I feel like the murders will carry a bit more weight if the PCs know one of the victims ahead of time.
Hello! I'm about to start up a Rise of the Runelords campaign, and I've got a group of brand new players. One has played 3.5 extensively, the other three are brand new to tabletop RPGs. I let them choose their own characters, and they ended up with the following:
The Hunter and Bard are going to be bow focused, the Inquisitor melee. I'm worried about this party composition. They don't have a full caster (either Divine or Arcane) and they don't have a full BAB character. The Inquisitor is their main healer and tank, with the Hunter pet also soaking some attacks.
I'm worried about this party composition. I'm hoping to run the module mostly as-is. I gave them 20 point buy, and I'm using the optional Hero Point system. Thoughts? Should I try to talk one of them into switching characters?
This came up on the BGG forum, and I think the rules are unclear on the timing here. The question is, does Lem use his "swap a card for a card in your discard" ability before, or after advancing the Blessings deck?
On the "Turn Over" on the reference sheet, it suggests that advancing the Blessings deck is part of your turn. To me, this would mean that if Lem is going to swap a card, it must be done before advancing the Blessings deck.
However, on page 9 it says "Before your turn, flip the top card from
Which is correct?
Without using a weapon, you cannot use the Snake and Lini's "bear form" to change the base attack die to 1d10 at the same time.
You can only use the Snake if you're making a Melee attack. Lini's Strength attack is not a Melee attack, unless you're also using a Melee weapon. Therefore, if you use the Snake without a weapon, you are using the default 1d4 Melee check as your base die. This is NOT a Strength check. It's just a Melee skill check, which is not associated with any particular attribute. Therefore, Lini cannot discard a card to change this to a d10.
My experience so far has been that the strategy changes a lot depending on the size of the party. With smaller parties (1-3 players), the Blessings deck isn't really an issue. It's not difficult to get through all the locations before the Blessings deck runs out. The challenge is keeping your characters alive, because defeating the various challenges is tough. Healing is important to keep your decks full.
With larger parties (4+), this is less of an issue because you can help each other a lot, and with proper scouting it's not hard to match skills to challenges. I find that we rarely lose a challenge with a large group, and healing is only used a 2-3 times total in a scenario. But the Blessings deck becomes a problem, so you have to use as many blessings and allies as possible to explore as much as you can. Use Detect Magic, Detect Evil, etc. as often as they come up.
I don't quite agree with this interpretation. The fact that it's Acid damage is irrelevant as far as whether or not it's Combat damage. For example, if I use an Acid Arrow spell to attack something, that is both Acid damage and Combat damage.
I may be wrong, but I think there are two cases where damage is "Combat Damage":
I'm going by memory here on these specific cards, but I believe the Goblin Commando does "1 Ranged Combat damage" before the encounter. This is Ranged Damage, and also Combat Damage. The Enchantress does 1 Fire Damage before the encounter. This is NOT Combat Damage. Theoretically, another creature might deal "1 Fire Combat damage" before the encounter. This would count as Combat Damage.
If a creature requires a check to defeat that is not a Combat Check, the resulting damage is not Combat Damage. The fact that it is coming from an encounter with a monster does not automatically make it Combat Damage, as far as I know.
Again, this is my interpretation of the rules, so I may be wrong. As always, I defer to Vic and/or Mike to tell us what's up.
That's not really what the rule says. I know that in terms of flavor, that's what's going on, but its not specified in the rule book that it's a Melee attack. It does say is that you can use your Strength or Melee skill, but it does not say that this check gains the Melee keyword.
Perhaps that's being overly pedantic, but rules are important.
Picked up this spell on Lem, which is fantastic. It raises a few questions in terms of timing.
The spell gives a +3 bonus to Charisma checks for the rest of the turn. The question is how this interacts with other spells. Now, you can't play more than one spell on one check, so if you encounter a monster, you can't use Glibness and then use Force Missile. But what if you've already used Glibness? Some use cases, and how I'm interpreting them:
1. I encounter an Ogre. I cannot use Glibness and then Force Missile to cast Force Missile with a +3 bonus. This violates the rule preventing me from playing two spells on the same check.
2. I encounter an Ogre. I use Force Missile to try to defeat him, and succeed. I then use Glibness to make my Recharge attempt easier. I get a +3 bonus on my Force Missile recharge, then a +3 bonus on my Glibness recharge. Since I still have a +3 bonus on recharges, I go ahead and use a Cure spell while I'm at it, and recharge that with a bonus as well.
3. I use a Cure spell. For my Cure recharge, I use Glibness and gain the +3 bonus on the recharge for both spells. Then, on the same turn, I encounter an Ogre. I use Force Missile to fight it. I still have the effects from Glibness, so I gain a +3 bonus on my Force Missile attack. This might be questionable, but my interpretation is that I didn't play Glibness on this check - I just still have the bonus from a previous play.
4. So if #3 is correct, then how about this? I encounter an Ogre. I decide to play Glibness immediately, before any checks occur. I play and recharge at +3. Then, I use Force Missile to combat the Ogre, gaining the +3 bonus from Glibness, which was played prior to this check.
I think the two main problems you're going to encounter are these:
2. You're going to find a lot of boons that nobody in your party can use. If you find the Meteor Swarm spell (hopefully... down the road some time) then you're just going to have to banish it. Not a huge problem, but it's going to limit what stuff you have available to you.
I don't think it will be untenable, but I think you're going to want to figure out ways to mitigate these problems, particularly the first one.
This has been mentioned before by several people, including myself. I would love to buy a set of all 11 minis that are used in this game.
Having a lot of fun with the game, but here are two suggestions that I think would make future versions of this game even more fun.
First, I'd add one simple mechanic: if a character encounters a card, but then fails to acquire/defeat it, he suffers the appropriate consequences as normal. However, another character at that same location can attempt the same encounter if they choose, before it gets shuffled back into the deck. So, let's say Lem encounters a monster. Unfortunately he doesn't have any attack spells in his hand, so he's defeated by the monster and takes damage. However, Seoni happens to also be at that location, so rather than returning the monster to the location deck, Seoni attempts to blast the monster with her Force Missile. She succeeds, and the monster is banished.
I think this would have a number of positive effects. First, it makes the game feel more like a party-based game, just like Pathfinder. Second, it would allow for some interesting abilities that can modify these situations. For example, maybe Valeros has the ability to step in and face a monster instead of the character who drew the encounter. Or maybe Merisiel can evade a monster, but leave some sort of poison that reduces the monster's effectiveness for a followup attack. Maybe Harsk has the ability to dictate who gets to face an encounter, or use his ranged attack to encounter a monster at another location. All of these would require a significant rebalance, but I think it would add a lot of fun interaction to the game.
Second, I'd like to see something different with the villain. I don't particularly like the villain running away from location to location. I'd love to see a "big bad guy" villain deck, using his deck for hit points the same way players use theirs. Maybe the characters have to explore various locations to find "keys" that unlock the final showdown with a villain. The villain is his own deck of powers that he uses against the players, but as players do damage, the villain is forced to discard them. Having a nice "boss encounter" like this would be a lot of fun, and would also add to the party experience.
This is a good solution, but it won't exactly duplicate the effect of removing cards when you advance to later adventures. By the standard rules, you'd continue to play Basic cards until they get banished, at which time they are permanently removed from the game. Using your method, you're not going to play Basic cards at all from that point forward.
I believe that by strict interpretation of the rules, you are correct. He cannot use the Amulet of Mighty Fists while he is using his class ability to substitute Dexterity for Strength.
However, I also believe this is an oversight by the designers, because the amulet is listed in Sajan's suggested starting deck.
So, we were playing the other night and my friend had an armor card in his hand. He felt that he didn't need it at that time, so after a victorious combat he wanted to recharge it to "reduce" the damage that he took, which was 0. We weren't sure if that was allowed.
Ultimately we decided against that, and he instead discarded it at the end of his turn.
I was playing Seoni in a game yesterday, and I acquired the Acid Arrow spell during the scenario. This is an "Elite" card, so I was excited to acquire it, but it turns out the effect is nearly identical to Force Missile and Lightning Grasp, which are both Basic cards. Same amount of damage, same recharge, except it's Acid damage instead of Force or Lightning. Is this really an Elite upgrade?
I agree it's unclear in the rules, so I think it's up for interpretation. One potential problem is that you might have players who pick specific items for the upcoming scenario. For example, you might pick up Holy Water if you know the Henchmen are going to be undead. I don't know if this is in the spirit of the rules or not. To me, I think this would add to the prep time of every adventure, so I am inclined to say this isn't allowed.
Vashtin Rahm wrote:
As the email from Customer Service that I received on August 12th says, "Product is expected to ship from the Paizo warehouse by Friday August 23, estimated 5 business days in transit." That means I'll be receiving it at the end of August, I would have saved more money by waiting for it to be released at the end of August.
For what it's worth, I got the same email you did on the 12th, and it arrived on Wednesday the 14th. I did not receive any additional emails.
In the rulebook, it says that when you play an adventure, you add the cards from that adventure into the "box" cards, so they're available for play. Do these accumulate over time? For example, if you play the initial adventure, then Burnt Offerings, then Skinsaw, is your box going to have cards from all three adventures? Or do you remove the adventure-specific cards after you finish that adventure?