Drow

Dracovar's page

Organized Play Member. 370 posts (373 including aliases). 3 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Organized Play character. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 370 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tender Tendrils wrote:

I think all of this talk of "she should have given clearer warnings" vastly overestimates humanity's ability to correctly interpret simple messages.

No matter how clearly you state something, people will misunderstand (or deliberately misinterpret) what you say.

Cleric of Sarenae - "I cast the Commune spell"

(for reference, the text of said spell: "You contact your deity–or agents thereof–and ask questions that can be answered by a simple yes or no. (A cleric of no particular deity contacts a philosophically allied deity.) You are allowed one such question per caster level. The answers given are correct within the limits of the entity’s knowledge. “Unclear” is a legitimate answer, because powerful beings of the Outer Planes are not necessarily omniscient. In cases where a one-word answer would be misleading or contrary to the deity’s interests, a short phrase (five words or less) may be given as an answer instead.

The spell, at best, provides information to aid character decisions. The entities contacted structure their answers to further their own purposes. If you lag, discuss the answers, or go off to do anything else, the spell ends." )

So, in all the history of Golarion, leading up to the nuking of Gormuz, not one, not a single cleric, bothered to ask their Goddess via a Commune spell "Hey boss, is it a good idea to live here?"

Pretty sure she'd have answered with a "NO". That's not vague, that's not unclear, misleading or contrary to her interests. It's pretty much spelled out for them. And every single cleric of Sarenae that asks that question via a Commune spell should have, in theory, got the same answer.

So, how do you screw that up?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I honestly thing Paizo should buy the rights to the never completed Fire Mountain product - Throne of Night. Then, take all the good bits from it (and there were lots) and incorporate into a really solid Darklands AP for Golarion.

Sure, it would show up as a 2E product at this point, but, that would even tempt me into buying, despite being a 1E devotee.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sloanzilla wrote:

I'm still a little confused:

* Regular Radiant Fire goes off: Baphy is destroyed but regenerates and still has his five or so remaining nukes. Players die but keep their souls.
* Modified (in Book 5) Radiant Fire goes off: Baphy is destroyed but regenerates and loses use of his five or so remaining nukes. Players die and also lose their souls for reasons I still don't understand.

5 nukes, especially with one placed in one of the world's biggest cities, is a pretty big deal, but so is an epic lich even without five nukes. A CR30 guy can probably do every bit as much damage without the nukes, IMO, it just might take a couple rounds.

I wish maybe he lost a couple mythic levels, or something, to signify a more significant reduction in power.

The idea with the nukes is kind of fun, but really, TB could just as easily fire off a Limited Wish for a Control Winds, and meta magic it with Widen to decimate large cities, armies, etc. Then, just turn a couple squads of Wraiths loose on the survivors. Sort of why the ending sucks so much - you sacrifice your leveled character to stop future uses of the Radiant Fire, and force TB back to regenerate himself. Whoop de doo! Means squat.

TB could systematically nuke a couple of cities/day easily with Tornadoes, and what's going to stop him? Well, not the PC's from this AP....unless a kind DM implements a certain Book 5 sidebar.

EXCEPT - I forgot, if going forward TB is now hamstrung by 2E casting rules, he's really been neutered way worse than losing his Radiant Fire nukes...


Yqatuba wrote:
What happens to Arazni at the end? I don't care about spoilers I just want to know.

She'll get setup for a Mary Sue Makeover ala Sorshen and Nocticula is my bet...if she hasn't shown up a Neutral (with possible intentions to become good) goddess in 2E already...


Main Pathfinder Lodge vanishes, but I'm sure the Harpers in Waterdepp would step up to take the reins.

Also, some of those 'big names' in Waterdeep are Greenwood waifu's - so, I'd expect them to be of similar power levels to Jacob's...

(grin)


Luca Eugenio Barlassina wrote:
More “magic-fire power” in Waterdeep?

Without a doubt. You roll a ball down a random street in the Realms and you can accidentally hit an Arch Mage...

Well, maybe not lately, but I gave up keeping up with Realms lore a long time ago (partially because there seemed to be so many damned ArchMages cluttering up the landscape).

From memory, albeit old and faulty, I recall Khelben, his consort Laeral, Halaster Blackcloak just to start, being key powerhouses in Waterdeep. Toss in some extra Harper influence, and the usual Greenwood local color, and ya, more "magic firepower" is probably going to be an understatement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The "Archmages per sq km" equation gets really thrown out of whack upon Waterdeep's arrival on Kortos.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Dracovar wrote:
We'll see where we are a year into the 2E launch, but I don't think it's going to be a good place.

*marks down 27th November 2020 in his Special Calendar with the name "Dracovar"*

*smiles*

*shades, vodka*

Heheh - I'd be happy to be wrong. And we can figure out how I send you a bottle of Vodka when the time comes. I'll put that in my special calendar... :-)


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Still a hard-core 1E fan. No intentions of moving to 2E. Way too much material in 1E still to explore. I like the system. 2E smacks of Dnd 4.0 which brought me to Pathfinder in the first place.

My group is also solidly 1E, having invested a lot in HeroLab, books, etc. None of us particularly liked the 2E playtest and haven't bothered to look since.

One of the real keys to my decision is that it's difficult to port over a radically different system UNLESS a lot of the capabilities, etc remain the same. DnD 2.0 to 3.0 worked - AND - had a very handy Conversion Guide to help. With a long running campaign (this is my 40th anniversary of playing DnD/Pathfinder) one does NOT just blow up the economy, the way magic works, etc, unless the new system is really compelling. I would have much preferred an evolutionary 1E -> Unchained kind of development than what actually showed up. It was too different, they nerfed things far beyond what I thought was necessary, screwed with the economics (Gold -> Silver AND change the basic pricing on stuff) and generally delivered something I just didn't want.

So, I cancelled my subs and only occasionally show up on the Boards now. We'll see where we are a year into the 2E launch, but I don't think it's going to be a good place.

Things I'm watching as time goes on:

1) Alexa website stats. Been tracking since March 2019. Trend for both worldwide rank and US rank is awful - people are not coming back here. US ranking is recovering a bit, with this latest playtest, but I expect further downward trends after Dec 2.
2) Paizo board activity. Return of the Runelords and Tyrant's Grasp should have generated lots of posts, buzz, etc. They didn't. Can Age of Ashes do better and reverse the trend? I think 1E people were already bailing out by the time of the last 2 1E AP's.
3) Amazon sales ranks over time.

I think it's going to be an "interesting" ride...


Still wrapping my mind around the whole idea of an Aasimar Kobold...


Cows into Goldfish.

Have a frat event at the local tavern to swallow goldfish. In older editions, death = return to original form. Not seeing that caveat in the Pathfinder version, so...Dispel Magic(s) it is.

Older editions polymorphing was way more fun (see Set's entry above). I was a fan of "Beholders in Bars" approach to creating some chaos.


Revan wrote:
Douglas Muir 406 wrote:


-- BTW: someone on another thread was fussing that Tar-Baphon is a boring villain. Are you frickin' kidding me? Given what happens in books 2 and 3, your players should HATE HATE HATE this guy. The clear thrust of the AP is that the players should be willing to throw themselves at TB in order to take him down, and... yeah? I should think?
It's like if you watched Star Wars and saw the Death Star blow up planets, but any scene involving actual conversations or character moments fom Darth Vader and Grand Moff Tarkin were cut. The Empire is obviously despicable and massively dangerous, but we'd be given no *personality* to hang it on. Tar-Baphon is a big fat cipher, a Generic Doomsday Villain without even the entertainment value of offering sadistic taunts. He's a villain that Paizo's been hyping for years, but I couldn't offer any new insights on his character after reading the whole adventure path dedicated to him. 'Scariest lich hates everything, has magic nuke' may be impressive, but it's not *interesting* on its own.

Maybe he gets more interesting in 2E.


JDawg75 wrote:

Yes, I've heard good things about Hell's Rebels, War for the Crown, Iron Gods, Ironfang Invasion, and Mummy's Mask.

Is your overall recommendation War for the Crown then? I'm a little leery about looking through these threads for fear of spoilers. I hope I'm not being intrusive.

J

Hell's Rebels would be another good one, too. I also liked Iron Fang Invasion, though sometimes you have to "roll with the railroad" in that one, especially at the start.

However, I think that if your GM is a bit creative, you can take War for the Crown to a whole new level, including lots of potential "post-AP" gaming. Some of the things that happen in the AP stretched my willingness to suspend disbelief, but, if your group really liked Kingmaker, I think they'd quite enjoy this one.

Without giving too much away, in War for the Crown the players are working for "the power behind the throne" (Princess Eutropia) rather than being thrust into the role of "the throne" itself. But, there is so much potential to take the AP off on tangents too. Not to mention a bit of "kingdom building" in your own little part of Taldor. AND - not everything need be solved by the sword, either - there are options where you can, with some really good diplomacy, affect your outcomes positively without having to kill everything.

Fun little endgame tidbit - HOW your party deals with various challenges throughout the AP (are they kind? are they violent? are they diplomatic? etc) will matter and set the tone for Taldor post-AP...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My recommendation: Read all the reviews, especially for Book 6, before committing to TG. The potential 'ending' may or may not resonate with your group. If your gold standard is Crimson Throne, well, TG is far from that level, quality wise. Just my opinion.

I think War for the Crown has a lot of excellent opportunities for role playing, combat, even some sandboxy style stuff in County Meratt. I'd go poking through those threads, see what you think...


DRD1812 wrote:

Suppose you've got new players. Suppose they're a bit on the young side, and are desperate to charge into combat, classes and consequences be damned. Aside from "let them die," how do you help them discover the concept of tactics and marching order?

Comic related.

I guess you could define "a bit on the young side". We talking high schoolers or 7-10 yr olds? Somewhere in between?

Usually, as a DM, I'd warn them, and then let them decide. If charging in with a squishy wizard gets em killed...well, maybe after a couple of examples of what Not To Do, the problem sorts itself out with more circumspect play. Evolution in action, basically. For young players, though, I'd probably knock em out, make em lose their stuff, but always leave that chance for them to recover. But, if they don't start to learn, well, gloves are off and welcome to Darwinism, my little friends...


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Not alone in the least. My campaign first kicked off in 1979. I revised things in the early eighties, and it's been persistent since then.

I'm not even thinking about going to 2E at this point. I'll need it to be a more mature system. And even then, maybe not. The Conversion Guide for 2E is a wee bit light on details, with a lot of, "wing it" types of situations, because it's just too different, IMO.

Going from 3.5 to 4 (back in the day) was a non-starter for so many reasons, not the least of which, it looked like an entirely different game. Not necessarily bad, but different. And there was no buy in from our group, either. So - Pathfinder was the perfect next step back then. Now? Noping out for a lot of the same reasons as we did from 4e 10+ years ago.


Back in the early days, it was called the Girdle of Many Pouches.

Our party had two of them, and carried all our loot (that could fit) in them. I think they were particularly handy for spell components.

Here's a LINK to a Google reference with XP cost and price...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Twisted_Fister wrote:

It would be nice to be able to use this set of boards as a reference, which is very difficult right now from all of the “just saying blah blah blah” crap. We get it, you don’t like it.... take this bs to reddit with the rest of them, because we’re trying to run games!

Not looking for argument, just get over yourselves a little.

Taking anything to Reddit also runs the risk that people engage Less and Less on these Boards, and more on others...until there isn't anyone left to discuss anything HERE.

Have you taken a look at Paizo.com's Alexa ratings and trajectory over the last few months? Really, we want people coming here - to voice opinions, etc - be them good, bad, controversial, etc.

On an old "What are you going to miss in 1E" thread - mine was the liveliness of the message boards - posted when Book 6 of the AP was coming out and the entire AP had a paltry 489 posts at the time (or something like that). That's not good. There are long term posters I'm used to seeing that just aren't posting anymore, it seems.

"Take it to Reddit?" Be careful what you wish for...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Zi Mishkal wrote:

@Dracovar

Yeah, we have a similar decision to make. Our campaign has been running for 7 years in PF. Moreover, I had a 1e campaign (which actually started as a basic D&D campaign) that I converted to 3e. With that older campaign I eventually gave up on hard conversions and did it more by "feel". Yeah, an 18 strength might equal a 23, but the feats, etc... made the character feel completely different.

My solution to this problem was to try to pare down each character to it's 'concept' - i.e. what was he/she really known for. Then try and replicate that in the new system and see what was left over. It didn't always work, but it usually came pretty close. It was a bunch of work, but about the same as trying to convert it using a formula.

The question is, as always, is it worth the effort? Like many people I have a ton invested in 1e and it's now "complete". I can rest, knowing that there won't be anything official added to it going forward. It's still a bloated, unintuitive system. Is it worth changing?

My feeling is that we'll migrate as a group if 2e is fun. And since we are only in book 1 of Tyrant's Grasp, we have a while to defer that decision. We're thinking of running a few short sessions of 2e in between books to see how it plays. As said before - fingers crossed it's good.

For me it's both the effort to convert and the 'feel' of 2E. When I look at what some of my original characters looked like, and what they are now under PF1E, they've evolved, no doubt. 5E or PF2E seems like a devolve somehow. Just purely subjective opinion tho, I don't expect that anyone shares it.

And, Tyrant's Grasp - **if you are the GM**, check my post history - and what I now call the "Cole Deschain sidebar". I think his endgame tweak really salvages the AP for me.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Cole Deschain wrote:

Also... cool as the tree rebirth can be, I've already got my epilogue planned, and it's a little different. Figured it'd give more of a sense of accomplishment to the players, while also tying back to a much-loved NPC from volume one...

Umble, the Nosoi from The Dead Roads approaches Pharasma with a small bag in her claws- containing the dusty remnants (the ash, if you will) of the heroes' souls.

The Lady of Graves does her usual "listen without saying anything" routine as Umble spells out the highly unusual circumstances of the case, finally concluding with an observation that for services rendered, if for no other reason, she hopes that something can be done, even if the souls as they were have been destroyed.

Pharasma actually reaches out, takes the bag of dust. Looks at it.

Says "Yes."

Cut to four children born on the same day in Absalom. Roll credits.

As someone who was rather annoyed with the AP's endgame and result for the PC's (book 5 sidebar not withstanding) I have to say...

THIS IS GENIUS. With potential timeline advance, you might even line up the children with some special trait(s), unusual backstory, all sorts of potential RP goodness, for an upcoming future AP - and your players get a neat 'reward' in a way.

Kudos Cole, kudos!

EDIT: I'm dubbing this the "Cole Deschain" sidebar...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Magnimar - lots going on, good product and AP support for it, makes for a nice logical "next step" if you use Sandpoint as a beginning, etc.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Zi Mishkal wrote:

As I read the guide the overwhelming message I get is that 2e is a completely new game from 1e, sharing only some superficial nomenclature with the older edition. And for me, that's fine. 1e was increasingly becoming an unwieldy beast.

It reminds me of trying to covert from 1e (or 2e) to 3e in DnD. You could hand-wave it, but a mathematical conversion was nigh impossible.

Here's hoping to the success of this new game :)

I can agree with you about the 2E comments - it is significantly different from 1E which makes it pretty difficult to convert. Back during the playtest, I mentioned that the migration to 3.0 was helped a lot by the conversion guide put out by WotC - but PF2E was just too different, I thought, for a meaningful guide to be made.

The ADnD2E to 3.0 Conversion Guide DID provide a lot more mathematical conversions, like 18(00) Strength = 23 in new system, etc, etc (don't quote me on the exact numbers, going from memory). So, I have to disagree with you there. Using that guide, I was able to migrate my Dnd 2E characters to 3.0 fairly easily. So, over the years, I've moved characters from White Box -> 1E -> 2E -> 3.0/3.5 -> Pathfinder. Tried doing that for Pathfinder 2E and frankly, hit a wall (a wall not unlike trying to go 3.0/3.5 -> 4E). If a new system deviates too much from the previous, conversion becomes more and more problematic.

For those of us that like to run persistent worlds (my current one is 35 yrs old) and also try to keep some verisimilitude across editions - radical changes just aren't good. That was one reason going to 4th Ed wasn't in the cards for me - I couldn't make it feel like DnD for me. So, when me and my group found Pathfinder, we loved it and went all in - and converting our 3.5 characters over was a breeze. Pathfinder 2E is different enough that I if I do choose to migrate (a lot of work) not only is that system on the table as an option, but so is 5E. But, much more likely, I will use some variant of the P6/P8/Px type of rules with Pathfinder 1E and choose a power level I'm comfortable with. Added advantage now is that I'll have a set of 1E rules that won't be seeing much more development/change (unless 3p guys really jump on doing 1e support and add some really compelling content).

EDIT - if I was going to 2E, I think this Guide is certainly helpful and while it does mention you may need to ad-lib more than a few things, there is enough crunch to make it useful. I hope Paizo updates it going forward as they release new 2E content/classes/etc. Some of us might not be 2E folks now, but down the road, once it's fleshed out with a few more products? I hope they look at this Conversion Guide as a living document and update/expand it as more content is created.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that the last few AP's have gone steadily downhill too, but my disappointment with the AP's escalated and started right around the time of the 2E announcement.

War for the Crown - I really liked the vast majority of this one. But with the 2E announcement coming out the Player's Guide was seemingly delayed until something like Book 3. That tempered my enthusiasm, frankly. For me, the glaring oddness to the AP

Spoiler:
was that we go from a potential civil war to all of Taldor uniting behind the "tragic prince" with little in the way of solid explanation (other than a couple of throw away lines of text to justify it).
Opportunity lost, I think, for a more interesting AP.

Return of the Runelords - hey, it's Runelords! Awesome! Alaznist is the lead baddie though.

Spoiler:
Xanderghul gets ganked off stage and there is a lesser version of him to deal with. Huh. Sorshen, the other powerhouse - co-opting the party and almost becoming that annoying DMPC - doesn't look like the group will be dealing with her.
I get it, I guess, she's slated for 2E - so, it's Mary Sue makeover time for her. Fun to deal with Runelords, but disappointing that the two big names - one is neutered down in power, the other is pretty much off the table.

Tyrant's Grasp - I would have thought the finale to 1E would have been much better than window dressing Golarion for 2E. You could play it for the sake of playing *something*, but what's the real point? Imagine doing Wrath of the Righteous, with a perma-TPK waiting at the end, and you don't even get to close the Worldwound with your sacrifice. That's Tyrant's Grasp. Another poster in another thread summed it up perfectly - Paizo was too attached to their NPC to let it be truly defeated.

I really think that Paizo was so focused on 2E that 1E became "this thing we need to wrap up" and the AP's reflect this.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Baby Samurai wrote:
Temperans wrote:
Just a nod to the Succubus thread.
And Redeemed Mind Flayers!

And Redeemed Drow! NO, wait! I don't want to turn back into an Elf. Like, can that even happen?


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Amaranthine Witch wrote:
Also, both Sorshen and Nocticula have left their lustful selves in PF1 along with their evil alignments and revealing outfits.
They have? I'm not sure I've seen anything confirming this. Both are CN now, certainly, and probably less inclined to be manipulative a&#%#!*s, but I've seen no evidence either is exactly chaste or disinclined to revealing outfits. Where's that info found?

Return of the Runelords for Sorshen - multiple volumes of that AP.

Tyrant's Grasp, Book 6 - Finale for 1E Dev entries and Nocticula's listing as a Goddess.

Sorshen's new look might be best described as sultry but tasteful in the artwork. Nocticula in Book 6 Tyrants Grasp? Ewww - one of the worst renditions (clothes or no) I've seen for her. Not a fan of that artwork at all. It's just plain bad.

All purely subjective, obviously. And nothing to do with the original purpose of the thread.


Well, unless Paizo has released something that addresses this specifically, I think you are pretty much stuck with RAI.

Keep in mind that the last little bit of Mythic that showed up - Psychic casters were able to designate if they wanted to be Divine or Arcane, and then the appropriate Mythic stuff would apply. So, it would not be unreasonable to assume Inspired Spell can cast Spirit Spells.

Consider - Shaman Spirit Magic regarding those Spirit Spells:"She adds the spells granted by that spirit to the list of spells that she can cast using spirit magic." AND "She can choose these spells from the list of spells granted by her spirits (see the spirit class feature and the wandering spirit class feature) at the time she casts them."

So, in my mind those spells clearly show up on the Shaman's Divine spell list, and thus, should be usable for Inspired Spell.

Just my 2 cents.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark the Wise and Powerful wrote:

Odd. I'm facing a lot of conflicted emotions as Pathfinder 2e approaches its launch Aug. 1 and 1e becomes history.

First of all, I'm absolutely dying to see what's changed in 2e since the PlayTest. I'm very much hoping there have been major changes to the action economy from what it was in the PlayTest -- which I very much didn't like. It's a critical factor. If it's still pretty much the same, a lot of other stuff is going to have to be really good to overcome my objections. I did like some of the readability enhancements I saw in PlayTest books -- and the new concept that some spells could have a crit. fail or crit. success. That's kind of cool.

Second, I hope 2e is successful -- even though I'm still committed entirely to 1e. I've got way too much of an investiment in 1e to really move forward to 2e. I'm not convinced it's going to be worth the effort to do conversions, on the fly or otherwise, to get 1e material to work in 2e or visa versa. Unless 2e is really good (and not just dumbed down as some people possibly unfairly claim), to me an elf is just an elf -- is other words in one way all these different systems are really the same thing. The challenge is really working within the systems to "win". Not really sure it matters which one in a way.

So, I'm also a bit depressed because my 1e world has become frozen in time. It now only has a past. There won't be more future. No point checking for all the exciting 1e new releases -- except, curiously, while very happy with the breadth of 1e rule books, and in spite of their flaws, I'm very happy that this set of really great books is finally finite. There won't be more rule books to overload GMs. We now have an opportunity to master the existing material -- and will do so excitedly probably for the next 10 years or so as long as we have players.

There's a number of people that really love 1e because it seems to fit the natural progression from the now overly simple D&D. I started with D&D in the 80s. We called it AD&D -- you can...

Right there with you, even down to the ADnD 1980's references (I started with the 3 booklet White Box set).

Going forward? While I lament the loss of future AP's (I dropped my AP subscription), I figure that I can always follow the 2E discussions of each AP - likely lots of tips/hints/etc at where the future AP's are going to take Golarion - and use those as inspiration for homebrew adventures. I have no interest in trying to convert 2E back to 1E, and have so much 1E material, I can pretty much use what I have for the rest of my life. Each person's iteration of Golarion will be unique - and the end of the 1E line doesn't necessarily have to mean that your Golarion has to be frozen in time too.

I see the advent of 2E being just like the "Time of Troubles" (and other such) when WotC does Edition Changes. All the AP's are assumed to be completed going into the 2E version of Golarion. Great if you want to "reboot the franchise" but useless if you still want that uncertainty of playing through a 1E AP and letting the result impact your version of Golarion (well, at least if you have a persistent world and don't run AP's in isolation). There are AP's I still want to run, and have the result impact my version of the world, without regard for what will be 2E canon going forward.


Smurfs?


Hello Paizo Customer service!

I previously requested that I finish off the 1st Edition AP and did not want the follow on item (#145 Hellknight Hill).

However, it was added to my order when I was alerted to the pending order today via email. Please REMOVE #145 Hellknight Hill from my order but KEEP #144 Midwives to Death.

AFter #144 has shipped you can cancel my subscription (which I think was already confirmed now).

thank you!


blahpers wrote:
Dracovar wrote:

I always liked turning a cow into a goldfish. Well, a herd of cows into goldfish.

Then taking them to a tavern and sponsoring a goldfish swallowing contest.

Dispel Magic and/or death of the polymorphed critter (usually via acid damage in the stomach) would, at least back in previous editions, cause the creature to revert back to original size.

Making for quite the Alien-esque "cowpocalypse" in the tavern.

Ah, I love variants on the ol' "throw a feather token (tree) in its mouth" strategy.

Used a feather token (tree) placed dead center of a railway track once, right before a bridge over a very high chasm and timed so the train couldn't slow down enough to save itself...

Then the item was banned... :-(


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I always liked turning a cow into a goldfish. Well, a herd of cows into goldfish.

Then taking them to a tavern and sponsoring a goldfish swallowing contest.

Dispel Magic and/or death of the polymorphed critter (usually via acid damage in the stomach) would, at least back in previous editions, cause the creature to revert back to original size.

Making for quite the Alien-esque "cowpocalypse" in the tavern.


kevin_video wrote:
Rysky wrote:
This suggested to me that you were. The heroes die, yes. But it's to stop Tar-Baphon. Paizo wouldn't write out a "you lose" cap to an adventure path, a 1shot maybe.

Sorry. I've only ever had toxic GMs in my life who loved lording over others while mocking and laughing aloud as they slaughtered characters time and time again. The idea that "there's no other way but this one fixed path" hits rather close to home.

Maybe Book 6 will have its own sidebar.

Ouch on the toxic GM's - that's rough.

Book 5 does have a sidebar - though it's still not quite enough, I don't think. I was thinking that if there has to be a sacrifice, maybe just one of the PC's is all it would take...might make for a more interesting ending from a player perspective.

I'm vaguely reminded of an old picture of the three surviving members of what was probably a 10 member team toasting their fallen comrades at the end of Return to the Tomb of Horrors. Maybe something like that - you just need one pure soul to make the sacrifice.

And then future Golarion highschools can bear the PC's name, or something, as a tribute...


Quote:
And for context you seem to completely conflate dying with losing. It’s not. The goal of the AP is to stop Tar-Baphon.

Actually, I believe the goal of the AP is to merely set TB back on heels for a while - we already know that in 2E, the 1E paths are presumed to be completed (successfully) and oh, what's this? Tar-Barphon is one of the new setting big baddies?

TB is still around after all the events of this AP. The players in this AP don't get to finish him off - they don't STOP TB, rather, they just slow him down and deny him his fancy nuke.

The goal of the AP, I firmly believe is:

Set the table for what Golarion 2E is going to look like. And that's pretty much it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Just seems that it's getting quieter and quieter here. I mean, we are about to release Book 6 of Tyrant's Grasp and the entire AP has a underwhelming 439 posts as I write this. I would have thought folks would have been all over these AP's - Return of the Runelords and then Tar-Barphon? Like, where is everybody?

I'm starting to miss the liveliness of the message boards, TBH.


I'm really going to be interested to see how they write up the "what if the PC's fail" bit that is usually part of the last installment.

We already KNOW what happens if they succeed (2E pretty much gives that away).

As for "survival horror", I think somewhere along the way they forgot about the "survival" part.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
I'd kinda be surprised if heroic sacrifice was the only option without some sort of "If PCs do things well, they can survive" thing since lot of APs have victory conditions were you get better result if you did better :p

Prepare to be surprised - the PC's future is bleak indeed. As Franz mentions above - there is a sidebar option suggested - but as written? All roads lead to some distinct unpleasantness.

I have to agree with Marco's comments - not a good design at all - unless you have player buy-in from the get go.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Of course, we'll have to wait until Book 6 to see how this all plays out - but I wonder - will the feedback loop that blows up Tar Baphon require ALL the obols embedded in the PC's? Or just some? Or what about just one?

Requiring an entire party wipe to end the AP "successfully" seems a bit of a stretch to ask of your players. I mean, you don't even kill off Tar Baphon, just set him back a bunch. Leaves an unsatisfactory taste in my mouth, frankly.

Now, if it just takes 1/4 to do the job - AND you apply GM fiat via the sidebar mentioned in Book 5 (wherein you, as GM, offer up a future resurrection for the sacrificed folk(s)), maybe it would work.

What bothers me about the design is the default seems to be leading the PC's to a perma-death at the end of the AP. I guess that's one way to retire high levels, but not one, as a player, I'm going to appreciate.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If I was a PC, right about the end of part 2 of the installment I'd be kinda pissed...

PC prospects going forward into Book 6 look bleak indeed.

So - just so I'm clear - the endgame for the PC's is to sacrifice themselves to create a feedback loop that blows up Tar Baphon and ends his ability to use Radiant Fire. However, given he's a lich (and what we already know about 2E so far...) he is coming back, just without his superweapon. And that's the goal of the AP, in a nutshell?

Effectively, from a metagame perspective admittedly, the PC's get to perma-death themselves in order to set the table for how Golarion 2E is going to look. At least the devs had the foresight to put in a sidebar suggesting the helpful NPC can arrange something for PC resurrection sometime in the future, after they've heroically sacrificed themselves. Gee, thanks for that.

What I eagerly await now is the "what if the PC's fail" outlines that typically show up in Book 6 of the AP's. This kind of 'ultimate sacrifice' might work ok in some groups, but I know groups that would take the boon (having their obols recalibrated to positive energy), and head for the hills.


Joana wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Marco Massoudi wrote:

When i wrote that if i were a Lich with an int score of 36 no one would ever find my phylactery, James Jacobs answered that if there would be no way to find T-B's phylactery there wouldn't be any point in making this AP.

I disagreed and said the pcs could just defeat him.
He heavily implied that that wasn't the case and that the AP would finish him once and for all.
Source?

Here and following. (Note that, since the bug in the Product Discussion threads hasn't been fixed yet, the link won't take you to the correct post; it's #37.)

I don't get the "heavy implication" Marco did from James's responses, however, just, as Cori Marie said, that James wasn't going to confirm or deny the insistence that the PCs couldn't actually kill Tar-Barphon in the AP.

(Marco, you should feel vindicated: you were absolutely right in your original prediction.)

Yup, Marco called it - and just wait until you read Book 5 of Tyrants Grasp...we learn pretty much what's in store, and the endgame goal, for the PC's.

And without a certain sidebar kicking into play via GM fiat, frankly, the endgame kinda sucks. Hoping, but not optimistic, about how Book 6 plays out. Seems more of a "hey, lets set Golarion up for 2E, finale" rather than ending the 1E Adventure Paths on a high note.


Run the encounter as planned. Start with Bill and the NPC's - giving the lone PC the chance to consider various courses of action.

If the assassins look as buff as you say they are, their swift and brutal execution of the NPC's should be a clear warning for the lone PC that he try to escape (or die).

It's a flying ship - if I was that lone PC, first thing I'm doing is jumping off this flying death trap when I get wind that an Alpha Strike of Assassins is on board.

Now, if aforementioned PC doesn't actually have a snapleaf or other method to survive a 20d6 plummet to the ground (when they own a flying ship...), I'd say, kill away. And let the lesson sink in...


Ridge wrote:

Cursed magic item trade

Helms of Opposite alignment are great gag gifts

Excellent April Fool's trick for that uptight Paladin in the party...


I know Mythic doesn't have a lot of love - but for something like a Dragon, even 1 or 2 Mythic ranks could help even the odds.

I'm thinking that with even a single rank, you can add Dual Initiative to the critter - which would make for a nasty surprise even for a seasoned group of players (if they weren't expecting it).

At 2nd rank: Dual Initiative (feat) + Amazing Initiative (2nd rank ability) (plus rebuild the Dragon with Improved Initiative (regular feat) and Mythic Improved Initiative (mythic feat)) and suddenly, you've got yourself quite a powered up Dragon.


Phillip Gastone wrote:
TheGreatWot wrote:
Nobody ever said anything about not brainwashing people... she's just gonna do it more subtly this time around! Gotta avoid war. That stuff gets expensive, and cleaning up bodies is a hassle.
Gelatinous Cubes

Disposal pits with Green Slime...


Grimniir wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Fighting Man, Magic User, Cleric.
Add a Thief, and you're it!

Well, DrDeth's cliche party literally predates 1st Edition - no thief in the old White Box, 3 booklet setup - I think thieves showed up with the Greyhawk supplement that came later.

Nice call out to the early days, DrDeth!


Make Heirophant your main choice, and dual path into Champion for damage (you can max your damage on a crit, etc - tons of damage dealing choices here). If going full on 10 mythic ranks, the DR 10/- that Heirophant gets is pretty solid capstone (plus other goodies too).

Inspired Spell - think about what you might be able to do if you go with a multiple ranks in Divine Source (Universal Path ability starting at rank 3) as well as having your Inquisitor spells ready as needed? The flexibility is huge.


zimmerwald1915 wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
The Shifty Mongoose wrote:
Also: when I GM Return, I will include a bit where Sorshen makes public apologies (probably abstaining from using a Magic Mouth or Mage's Decree for them) for all the evil stuff she did, and will sentence herself to ten thousand years' of solitary confinement, followed by community service.
So, basically she can then immediately say "Already did the solitary confinement the last 10k years and providing a realm for exiles and outcasts is "community service" if you look at the term from the right angle". ^^

Yes, that's the joke.

And now for something completely different: how does New Eurythnia sustain itself? Artists make art, of course, but you can't eat art (well, I guess you could, but it wouldn't keep you alive). The boheme is characteristically unproductive, and putting them to work on farms or in workshops is hardly libertine. Is Sorshen planning on making a Tippy-realm, where food production is handled by create food traps?

Perhaps she can pull a Mao-style Cultural Revolution and force the artists to become farmers....?

But, that might lead to a rather high body count, and subsequent slide back into Evil, so Tippy-style it is! Or, trade art for food...the Hold of Belkzan is starved for art, the orcs yearning for post-modern art pieces knows no bounds....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheGreatWot wrote:
Let's hope Arazni isn't the next candidate for redemption, then. I haven't read Tyrant's Grasp but if the trend you're describing continues, she'll probably be next. :p

Oh, I bet we are in for some new lore about Arazni come 2E...with the events of Tyrant's Grasp as the catalyst.

Also, as Erudite Malefactor opined, there seems to be a "type" and Arazni fits the description, for the most part. Pure conjucture, obviously.

I'd have been much happier if they left them "as is", frankly. It's as if all these powerful evil entities cut from some "specific cloth" keep getting Mary Sue Makeovers.

Maybe Paizo can throw me a bone and have Iomedae fall from grace and takeover for Nocticula...


Yqatuba wrote:
I vaguely remember a neutral chromatic dragon mentioned somewhere (I forget what color and which neutral alignment).

Ok, despite some entertaining discussions on eugenics, here's a possibility:

https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Olohimba

Olohimba (a green) worships Pharasma. Pathfinderwiki doesn't list an alignment (which they do for almost all the other dragons they have cataloged). With Pharasma being Neutral, we might have one serious contender for a "neutral' Chromatic dragon w/Olohimba.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
Considering that 16-year-old Hermean natives are supposed to be exiled if they fail their test, it seems odd that nobody ever sees or hears from such an exile. Maybe they have to sign some sort of mystical NDA.

NDA = 'Nother Dragon Appetizer


Hermea humans are bestest humans!

Mengkare did nothing wrong!

Better breeding through genetic manipulation is a great pastime, especially when you've got a long, long lifespan. It's Good because it's for the Greater Good. And it's Good to be Good. All Gold Dragons know that. If you aren't with them, you aren't Good. And if you aren't Good...well, Dragons have to eat too.

Mengkare/Hermea - "Building better people for a brighter future."

(defectives will be disposed of...often with a delicious sauce suitable for a Dragon's refined palate.)

1 to 50 of 370 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>