Erkenbard the Eyeful's page

My players were terrified, gobsmacked, especially the level 8 rogue who got hit and I rolled 4 on a 1d6 for level drain. Fortunately no lasting damage. I can rectify the situation without affecting the scenario play. Thankyou very much Falcar,

OK, so the wraith doesn't drain any levels? it does 1d6 damage and 1d6 Con drain

I feel like that's really lethal, but I read it as that in the Bestiary. Is that right? And there is no actual regular hit points damage?

Erkenbard the Eyeful wrote:

Secondly, running water blocks Locate Person, but the spell acts like Locate Object, which is blocked by a thin sheet of lead. So would lead also block Locate Creature?(not that the boy was in a lead-lined room).

Reading the RAW, I'd have to say yes, locate creature is blocked by both running water and lead. Although that brings up an interesting question, how does the running water part work?

A thin sheet of lead can block all lines from the caster to the target; we are probably all imagining that the lead is oriented like a wall when we think of it blocking the spell. But running water is usually oriented like a floor. All lines of effect would pass over it. If having the LOE pass over a stream blocks it, how high above it does it go? Or how far below? Or would you have to hide behind a waterfall?

Good question, Erkenbard.

Good questions Scott! And thanks guys for confirming what I thought ... I did have it correct. Just wanted to check. I guess a waterfall could block it as the water is kind of running down. But it's probably based on streams and rivers ... I guess a running-water stream completely blocks it no matter how high or how far below. But I am happy to be over-ruled! Also, there could be an underground stream that the players cannot see if they cast it in a city. What about water flowing through sewers?

The adventurers were looking for a person who was being held captive in a dungeon below a building. The Witch Level 7 in the party has "Locate Creature" so she cast it and I could see no reason to not allow the spell to locate the missing person under the building (he was tied up in a dungeon within range of the spell). The whole idea of them "searching" the place to see if he was there was blown away. They knew he was there. I simply told them the boy was detected beneath the building. Simple question: Did I get the spell right? The adventurers had previously met and talked to the kidnapped boy. Also, I had decided that no nondetection/misleading spells were in effect. Secondly, running water blocks Locate Person, but the spell acts like Locate Object, which is blocked by a thin sheet of lead. So would lead also block Locate Creature?(not that the boy was in a lead-lined room).

You could have them breaking into the extortionist cult of Razmir in "Masks of the Living God." I and the players loved that scenario and you could have all the cultists off on some mission leaving a skeleton crew of the barbarian Krant and a couple of senior clergy. They are not the "mafia" as such ... well, actually they are in all but name. They are a divine magic-free cult of extortionists/bullies/murderers. It7s basically an outpost of Razmiran in the heart of a foreign city (Tamran in Nirmathas) and the locals are terrified of these "cultists."

If you try not to hit monsters you're doing it wrong. This is not a game for pacifists.

If you want to miss you don't attack.
If you want to pretend you are attacking but deliberately miss, then you need to Bluff those you are trying to hoodwink.
Easy. No rule necessary. Simple interpretation.

For initiative you can delay your turn and take up a new initiative order below everyone else.

You can not attempt to save from spells. But you cannot just take a 1.

Remember that Protection From Evil is effective it.

Yes, I am aware of that. Thanks.

Thanks. Never DMd such a powerful monster before.

In a fight if the vampire successfully dominates one of the heroes and tells them to go and wait in the next room, can it then in the next round try and dominate another hero and tell them to go and wait in the next room? So that if the vampire is strong enough eventually all party members could be in the next room for the next 1 day per level. Also IF one of the party members in that room then has Dispel Magic can they try and dispel the dominate effect as surely they know they are all dominated as they are not mindless and are fighting against it? Or can they discuss how to get rid of the domination?

Scroll is wasted.

A scroll is a spell (or collection of spells) that has been stored in written form. A spell on a scroll can be used only once. The writing vanishes from the scroll when the spell is activated.

The scroll was activated. Whether it works or not is irrelevant.

Its not that we need to show a rule stating that, its that you need to try to find a refund rule (which there isn't)

It's just as I thought. I was just checking. I might have missed a rule somewhere. So folks, it is pretty clear what the rules are. Me as DM will just deal with the situation as always. I could feasibly have them find maybe a lesser but useful scroll as backup so they are not too bummed out if it messes up.

If they can catch both of them in one casting, they are sure to hit the weaker one, and they'll at least get the saving throw.

Two separate encounters

You could allow knowledge checks of the appropriate type on the 2 monsters to 'realize one is too powerful for the effect' if you desire to help hedge their guess.

Nice idea, but the monsters are real close in power at the climax of a big scenario, so it's really not obvious. And they're pretty weird monsters. It's not like one's a vampire and one's a ghoul. I am more concerned with the general rule. I guess there isn't one. So it is just total luck. The players just don't know if the spell will work or not.

Val'bryn, I don't know why it wouldn't be used up, hence my question. I kind of want to double check here because I know my players will question it if the spell fails in the upcoming scenario.
They have a powerful scroll but it will only work against one of the monsters due to the HD roll. Of course they don't know which monster. I guess then it is a wild guessing game. If they use the scroll against the 9HD monster it works but if they use it against the 10HD monster it doesn't. But what happens if they meet the 10HD monster first and waste it? I mean, how on earth do adventurers know how many Hit Dice the monsters have? Of course they don't and they shouldn't know. It's a wild guessing game then and the loss of a really powerful scroll if it fails. If that is so, then so be it.

A sleep spell causes a magical slumber to come upon 4HD of creatures. What happens if you cast the spell off a scroll only to find the creature has 5HD. I mean, the caster has no idea how many HD the enemy has usually. Is the scroll wasted or not? And can someone point out where this is in the rules (not just Sleep but other spells, what happens if a Disrupting Weapon Caster Level 9 scroll is used against a 10HD vampire? Is the scroll used up?) Thankyou.

The Guide to Korvosa does not list dueling as illegal. It mentions duels as becoming more frequent within the Acadamae, without saying duels are against or within the law. It does make a difference between formal and informal challenges (the latter of which are called 'trouble' for the Acadamae tiefling guards). Finally headmasdter Toff Ornelos has defeated 17 wizards in secret mages' duels. (Does secret imply they are not allowed?)

The Fencing Master short story (somewhere on this site) also mentions dueling as something that happens in Korvosa, but again it doesn't really state whether or not it is illegal.

So dueling is certainly a thing in Korvosa. There are no sources to confirm its legality, so, like so many things, it's a GM's call.

Thanks. You seem to be pretty sure on the sources and clearly have access to those books.

Right now I think I will have it banned. I am tempted to go with my original plan of seeking permission from arbiters. I am also very happy if people would tell me what they think would be a good idea.

I am aware of Orsini and possibly other like him, but that does not necessarily allow dueling in streets and possible deaths.

There is at least one sword school/fighting academy that sounds like a duelist's dream, the Orsini Academy. Its headmaster is a famous local swordsman, Vencarlo Orsini.

And if kung-fu movies have taught me anything, its that where there is one fighting school, there will be others, and the students will duel to prove superiority of style.

But as a very lawful community, it is probably illegal, unless maybe a contract detailing terms was written up by both parties and then authorized (for a fee).

Yes, if I make my own decision on it ... I was thinking of the parties must be noble or held in high esteem and that if they go to an arbiter it can be authorized. I didn't think of a fee but that's cool, because if it's expensive then it kind of favours nobles or rich people anyway and the so-called "riff-raff" won't be killing eachother left, right and centre. Cheers

I have integrated much of Curse of the Crimson Throne into my own campaign and the party are at the Blood Veil plague stage. A PC just asked me if dueling was legal in Korvosa. The PC is Tour Kegbelly, a CG dwarf fighter level 7 of some fame (he routed Barvasi and was awarded the Drake's Mark medal) from Janderhoff, and he has an ongoing dispute with Jukk the Juicemeister, an influential LE dwarf rogue/merchant from the same dwarven citadel who is in charge of the trading between the two cities and has very tough bodyguards. Both dwarves now live in Korvosa. I was doubting dueling would be allowed as arbiters/magistrates exist to settle disputes. In extremely lawful and supposedly more advanced cities dueling would unlikely be allowed, replaced by trials or rulings by said arbiters. When the dwarves clashed in Janderhoff earlier I had a trial by jury and Kegbelly was jailed for one week on trumped-up charges of impersonating Jukk (casually in a bar) and thus interfering with dwarven trade. Kegbelly now seeks revenge or to put an end to the feuding once and for all. Can someone tell me if anything has been published on dueling? Or give me their own ideas.

Thankyou for the opinions. There is no way I am changing systems. I will continue with Pathfinder. Like I said at the start, I just want to try and shorten combat, which is exactly what I will do, one way or the other or many ways. Also I am not interested in the other "ideas" put forward. I have read numerous threads on this. I already know about 99% of them and some I use, some I don't. So back to my original post ...
After listening to some excellently perceptive opinions here, I will not pursue my initial idea of maybe allowing auto crits and fumbles on a 20 and 1 with no confirmation.
I will do what I've been doing for 2 years since I started playing Pathfinder ... with crits and fumbles a confirmation roll to hit or miss is made after a 20 (18,19 some weapons) or 1 is rolled. But I will start limiting the fumble chance to the first attack of all combatants who have multiple attacks such as high-level fighters and monks, but not to MOST monsters.
The major change I will test out is what I will call the "Lucky 3" rule. Starting on round 3 and continuing thereafter all combatants will be at +3 to hit with any weapon in a combat.
Also I have changed the crit and fumble tables from what I pasted before, and instead simplified them such as -2 AC until the end of combat (not stackable) for most fumbles etc.This will also quicken combat with more people getting hit.
It's debatable whether these house rules penalize martial classes rather than spellcasters, as some have said above. Combats just end quicker and more damage is dished out by both sides equally, and although spellcasters do not fumble, they could well suffer from being on the end of a javelin hurled at +3 and if the spellcaster strays anywhere with range they would stand a much greater chance of getting smacked on round 3 and later with that +3. And anyway, if one or the other gets a slightly worse deal then so be it. The priority is simply to shorten combats.
I have already discussed it with my 5 players (four of whom have been with me for a long time) and we're going to give this a go anyway and see what happens. I might report back later.
Again thankyou. Many of the comments above helped me reach this conclusion. And I'm sorry if you don't agree with what I'm doing, but it's what I want to try out.

Erkenbard the Eyeful wrote:

FUMBLES
If you roll a 1 on an attack of manouver roll (including climb, acrobatics etc.) during combat you miss/fail and can take no further action for the rest of the round.

In other words, "f%&! martials". Casters never take this risk if they never cast an attack roll spell, and martials' chance to fumble increases dramatically as they get more experienced.

I also think this penalty, let alone your fumble table on top of it, is ridiculously punitive. So is the Critical Damage table, considering that affects PC's a lot more than it does enemies (who generally don't survive first contact with the PC's). It might be that you're going for a grittier and more realistic campaign, but that doesn't match up with the hokey slapstick from the fumble table.

I am thinking of having fumbling on the first roll only. Not on each roll if a PC or creature has multiple attacks. Also, one has to confirm the fumble roll with a miss roll. Anyway, surely the +2 on attacks compensates and gives a massive advantage to martial folk. I was thinking of now introducing this attack bonus as +3 after 3 rounds rather than +2 after 5. Doesn't that balance things out. I I think Johnico's suggestion is interesting but going up to +6 is surely overkill. Anyway, action will be taken because these combats have to end quicker.

If you want to speed up combat, have you considered porting in the Escalation Die from 13th Age? Basically, it's a big d6 that starts at 0 round 1 and increases by 1 each round until it hits 6. PCs and certain big boss types gain a bonus to attacks equal to the Escalation Die. Gets the same idea as your "after 5 rounds, everybody gets a +2 Attack and -2 AC" but in a simpler, more streamlined way and also makes the change more gradual instead of a sudden change.

I highly recommend you make some changes to your Fumble rules. I don't personally like fumble rules (whether you have them or not is up to your group, obviously), but I'd recommend adding some changes to make it so that martial characters don't get more likely to fumble as they level up (more attacks per round = fumble more commonly). A common method of doing this is to make it so that only the first attack each round can prompt a critical failure, so a fighter with BAB +18/+13/+8/+3 can only fumble on the +18.

Also, add something so that spellcasters can get screwed over as well when they cast. It doesn't make sense that the guy who swings a sword can screw up and accidentally cut his own head off but the crazy wizard goofing around with the fundamental fabrics of reality can't screw up just as hard.

Hmm (about fumbles). After reading the last couple of posts I get what you and Athaleon are getting at. I need to seriously think over the fumble rules. I am looking for a more gritty realistic game, admittedly, as Athaleon guessed. The Escalation rule looks good. I think I will switch to that (I had considered it actually, not knowing about the game you mentioned). Good.

Erkenbard the Eyeful wrote:

FUMBLES
If you roll a 1 on an attack of manouver roll (including climb, acrobatics etc.) during combat you miss/fail and can take no further action for the rest of the round.

In other words, "f+!! martials". Casters never take this risk if they never cast an attack roll spell, and martials' chance to fumble increases dramatically as they get more experienced.

I also think this penalty, let alone your fumble table on top of it, is ridiculously punitive. So is the Critical Damage table, considering that affects PC's a lot more than it does enemies (who generally don't survive first contact with the PC's). It might be that you're going for a grittier and more realistic campaign, but that doesn't match up with the hokey slapstick from the fumble table.

It's a work in progress ( as stated). Don't get over-excited. Thanks for the input regarding martials. I agree. It all needs a further overhaul and could even be scrapped. The fumble table is not as critical as the ... critical table.

This is my latest plan (but my next session as DM is not until December 9 so I can mull it over further)...

Starting Round 5: +2 to hit and -2 on AC for everyone.

FUMBLES
If you roll a 1 on an attack of manouver roll (including climb, acrobatics etc.) during combat you miss/fail and can take no further action for the rest of the round.
Make a second roll and if you fail to hit/succeed you take -2 AC for the rest of the combat (usually this is when initiatives of all players end even if you have withdrawn; although DM may make exceptions) and roll on the fumble table.

Fumble Table
1: Concussed/Confused … cannot take any action/move for the next 1-4 rounds.
2: Opponents get a free attack of opportunity even if they have already had one.
3: Hit self (roll damage with bonuses)
4: Hit nearest friend (roll damage with bonuses; if no one in range hit self)
5: Broken weapon. Magical weapons get a DC10 save, apply + modifier to roll. (broken weapon can be used as club or even to slash but is at -4 to hit and does just 1-3 basic damage)
6: Twisted ankle. Fall prone, -4 Dex (manual dexterity OK), no run and half movement for 12 hours.
7: Slip in blood or goo. Fall prone
8: Lose one’s voice until end of combat.
9: Drop weapon (or whatever one is holding; if nothing then first lose ring, second backpack)
10: Poop one’s pantaloons. Half movement until end of combat.
11-20: No further penalty above the -2 AC.
Note: If a fumble cannot apply move down to the next one (gets worse) and apply that.

CRITICAL HIT

On a natural 20 a critical hit is scored and double damage is done, with all your usual bonuses. (Remember some weapons might do a crit with an 18 or 19 too)

Now make a second roll. This acts as a confirmation roll to do a crit with certain weapons (if you rolled 18, 19 on the first roll) and also to do x3 or x4 damage with certain weapons.

If you roll a second natural 20 then you roll on the Serious Injury Table.

CRITICAL INJURY TABLE

20 Death Blow

(Slashing) Foe's head flies off in a random direction landing 3-18 foot away. (Or carteriod artery is severed, fountain of blood erupts, and foe dies within a minute)

(Piercing) Eye and brain pierced leading to instant death

(Bludgeoning) Blow forces foe's jaw upwards into lower part of brain. Foe falls to the ground, twitches for a couple of seconds and then lays still.

19 Loss of leg below knee (half movement with crutch/peg leg, cannot charge, -1 Dex, but not for manual actions; -5 ride, climb.)

18 Loss of arm (-5 climb, disable device, heal, swim; cannot use 2-handed items/shield)

17 Loss of hand ((-5 climb, disable device, heal; cannot use 2-handed items)

16 Severe blow to head; possible brain damage (in coma for 2-5 days; Fort DC15 or loss of 1 INT)

15 Loss of eye (-2 on visual perception, -1 in combat, -1 on AC)

14 Major facial scar (-1 Charisma, +2 Intimidate)

13. Severe head blow. (Coma. Make Fort DC20 roll per hour to awake)

12. Loss of ear. (Deafened for 24 hours)

11. Minor but visible facial scar. (Blinded for 24 hours)

1-10. No further penalty (bar the -2 AC)

Rackdam wrote:

Thing is, if you give your PC auto crit, you have to give it to your minion too. Ans since there's a lot more minion (usually) than PC overall, this will result in a lot more PC death overtime.

I think, not 100% sure. I've never done it with auto-crit so :S

No, you don't really have to give it to minions.

The way I run it is 20 is an auto crit for PCs and bosses *ONLY*. Minions rolling 20 are simply an auto hit. My games still have enough close calls to keep things exciting without the threat of some random mook one-shotting a PC on a lucky 20.

I don't do fumbles unless the players agree to it. Some of my players really like using them, some don't. I ask before the campaign starts and go from there. Generally, fumbles just give an appropriate penalty for a few rounds or until the PC takes an action to fix it. Slipping in blood, stuck blades, broken bowstrings, that sort of thing.

From level 4 or 5 on, the adventurers should have enough defence mechanisms (magic etc) and sufficient hit points to absorb the odd crit from a lowly minion anyway.

For speeding up combat to eat up less time, I would ask first, what you believe is making those combats take so long?

The house rules you propose don't seem to me, to have the potential to shave off a lot of time by themselves.

Do you have some insight as to what is dragging out combat?
To figure out what to fix, properly identifying the major causes is needed.

The two major cause I've come across for such delays, (my experience, not necessarily your group) are:
* GM/Players not knowing enough about the rules/characters. Anyone having to look up things in the middle of combat (regular stuff, not uncommon ones), can grind things down pretty badly. A Gm can always familiar themselves better, to quicken things. And the players should absolutely know what their characters can do, and how their abilities, feat, spells work.
* The other big factor I've seen, is religiously using maps/minis. Certainly, they can be a major, positive addition to the game. But, setting up and moving all those pieces, maybe when it wasn't entirely necessary, slows things as well. If you can get away without them for certain encounters, or figure out ways to streamline, that can help too.

If neither of those apply in your case, what are your observations?

Thanks for your input. The thing is, I think it's simply that monsters and PCs have too many hit points. Hence my plan. An alternative could be, I guess to wipe out 25% of hit points of all PCs and monsters. Also damage resistance recently became an issue as in the last two humungously long battles they fought vampire spawn and wererats and didn't all have the best weapons (i.e. silver etc). But that wererat battle in Curse of the Crimson Throne literally took an absurdly long 2 and a half hours last week (I even cut 2 regular wererats out of the battle; party was anInquisitor level 7, paladin level 3, witch level 6 and brawler level 5; although the die rolls to hit were admittedly dreadful from the party and there was almost a TPK, finally just the paladin retainer died). Players not knowing exactly what their character can do is an issue and I have cracked down on this, so I count down 6 seconds all the time if they dawdle, but still we sometimes need to look stuff up. I guess I don't want a PC to die because of a rule mistake, but there's no way I can know every rule and sometimes I forget stuff so I tend to look it up. As for minis, I love the minis so I can't cut that, but I understand what you mean.

I run an intrigue-packed campaign and I want to dramatically curtail fights that last 2 or 3 hours so that we can get back to politics and role-playing. I have tried many things so I don't need obvious advice on how to quicken combat ... I just want to ask would there be any major problems if I made a house rule that a natural 20 is an auto crit and a natural 1 is a fumble (with result you get -2 AC for the rest of the combat or can only take one action, move or standard). Also after 5 rounds of combat everyone gets +2 to hit and -2 on their AC. The idea being the faster people hit eachother the more damage done and the faster the combat ends. What are the main drawbacks of such a radical house rule??? I'm sure I am missing some major potential problem. (Note: Currently the party level is 6-8)

They do get a Perception check vs. the transformed creature's Disguise check (which, as part of the regular Polymorph rules, gets +10 on the Disguise).

What page are those rules on or can you give me a link please?

Another thing about Alter Self. How come people viewing the altered creature don't get a save or a perception check to sense that something weird is occurring, a hunch even that all is not what it seems, especially as it seems when altered the creature cannot do exactly what the other creature can and also would be acting in a kind of alien way as its brain is not of its species. Even if it should be a really high DC to spot this. Or am I missing something?

Polymorph Any Object should be able to hit the target you're looking for, but it is a higher-level spell (L8).

Depending on whether you're the GM or a player, you may have additional options as Rule 0 is a very powerful rule.

Yes, I am the DM so I know I can do whatever, and this situation actually involves NPCs (the barbarian is an NPC). But I like to have a rule grounding as much as possible even in what NPCs do. I guess I should not worry about the rules so much in this kind of situation. I will mull over the Polymporh Any Object spell a little longer. Thankyou.

Sounds like you want a Greater Hat of Disguise

That could work if there's no other way. An item achieving the aim would be ok. Thankyou Doomed Hero.

I want a medium human barbarian to appear to be a kobold and infiltrate a town alone and stay in the kobold form indefinitely or for as long as possible. The barbarian will have to stay in the town for 2 or 3 years and pretend always to be a kobold. He would not have direct access to the spellcaster who polymorphed him in the first place as the town is very small and in the wilderness. That spellcaster could perhaps visit once every two or three months. It seems permanency does not work with this.

The vast difference in coloration would be obvious with Darkvision and not just in low light. Dark elves are coal black or dark purple in colour and the regular elf is pale and would be unlikely heavily suntanned. It's easy to tell the difference with Darkvision. if the Drow wanted to appear as regular elves they could use Disguise skill and apply makeup (and vice versa for eleves wanting to appear as Drow).

So if you picked up the helpless ally then you could do this without provoking an AOO from any square threatening the ally's original square. And after the end of your turn the helpless ally would then be inside your square.

Your unconscious comrade is knocked out in the next square to you. If you bend over/reach across and lay on hands or heal or give a potion to this unconscious ally, do the foes within striking distance of the helpless comrade get an attack of opportunity on you? Or are you considered to still be in your own square for attacks of opportunity?
Or both? I mean, your hands and part of your body must be in the helpless ally's square in order to help them? Please point me in the right direction ...

The body parts of dead monsters surely retain magic or have intrinsic chemical properties otherwise they would not be so prized by alchemists and wizards and the like, and used as material spell components. I recently decided that the dwarf fighter in our party will receive 30 gold pieces for each Xill egg he has been carrying since they were surgically removed from his stomach a few months ago. If he had sold them fresh he would have got a lot more.

Hydras have acidic bile, so just like with puffer fish, you'd need a certificated experienced chef to slice it up. Same as a black pudding, full of acid. Not a good idea to bite into it. And a gelatinous cube would not taste like jellyfish.

The players in my group often try and eat monsters/creatures they have killed. This is not an issue with things such as wild boars or even owlbears, but last session they ran out of rations in the wilderness and chopped up a basilisk they had just killed. Fresh basilisk blood has certain unique properties such as returning a creature from stone to flesh if applied soon after the basilisk's death. Would it be edible? They also have xill eggs? Are xill eggs edible? Or would they get diarrhea? I usually use common sense as a DM but the basilisk steaks got me thinking.

No. Because it is a divine scroll and not an arcane scroll. Even if a wizard and a cleric have the same spell on their lists it is not written in the same "language." The one draws from divine sources, the other arcane. Rule: The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells.

Thankyou all for your posts. This is the kind of advice I hoped for. As that's how I played it! Cheers!

It should specify in the basilisk's Special Ability info whether you need to make a Fortitude saving throw to return (alive and ok) from stone to flesh using the basilisk's blood. I saw an old thread here and no answer was given. Recently, is there an official answer? I might have missed it somewhere. It happened right at the end of my game last Saturday. I didn't ask for a saving throw at the time, although now I am thinking it probably (common sense) is required. Basilisk creature (no mention of save): "A creature petrified ... that is then coated ... with fresh basilisk blood ... is instantly restored to flesh." Stone to Flesh Spell: "This spell restores a petrified creature to its normal state, restoring life and goods. The creature must make a DC 15 Fortitude save to survive the process."

This exact issue just arose in my campaign. Two players got turned to stone last weekend. A surviving PC saw a carving in the ceiling of the basilisk's nest depicting one of the lizard's strung upside down, throat slit and blood being collected in a bucket by some dwarves (a clue installed by me as DM). So the remaining adventurers then smeared some blood on the petrified and I ruled that the part of the statue momentarily softened and became like flesh. Then they covered the statues with blood and I allowed the characters to return to flesh and I did not have them make a save (maybe because I had NOT checked the stone to flesh spell. This happened right at the end of the session so next session I could get them to make the FORT 15 save, or I could let it go. I think I will let it go ... although to be quite frank the "realism" side of me says that they should really make the save, as basically the process of stone to flesh is arduous, that's what the spell infers, and if it is arduous spell or no spell then it is STILL going to be an arduous process. Hmmmmm ... a head scratcher is this.

Thank you all for the comments. I enjoyed reading all of them on an interesting topic. Some of the comments may help, in some lovely bizarre ways, of improving this quest scenario I wrote myself. Just fyi ... the cleric wants to complete the quest because right now he is level 5 and has no spells until he atones ... also, though, he has been aware that he was about to go on the quest for some time so he has had plenty of time to organize himself. The scenario is now ongoing and if anyone is interested they can watch the videos on the facebook page "Pathfinder RPG Tokyo." It's been a long-running issue for the cleric and he's dealing with it while the other half of my campaign group deal with the wonderful Curse of the Crimson Throne.

Erkenbard the Eyeful wrote:

Can you think of an activity where the stat penalties WOULD kick in? I guess if he went on another non-linked adventure, or just pursued non-quest activities in the city for 24 hours or longer. He has been warnnd that when the quest kicks in he must pursue it or face penalties.

Repeat offenses would absolutely qualify. I'd say if he didn't learn from the first time, then it's fair game. And, if he's doing anything in the city other than getting necessary supplies, then you can start letting penalties creep in.

I'd be pretty merciless, too, if he got distracted, detained, or delayed on the supply run. A delay from an honest mistake is one thing. That mistake compounding to more delays and problems is in "you made your bed now lay in it" territory.

That's good advice. Thanks very much.

If you want to be a killer GM, then sure.

If you want to be less aggressive because players sometimes underestimate the resources they will need, and the success of the geas depends on them not dying, then give the cleric a break. It's a reasonable thing to go back for necessary supplies.

I'm not the killer GM type. I try not to be anyway. I often post here to help me rein myself in when I feel I could be being too aggressive, so as to help me be more reasonable as DM. I agree that it's fair to let him go back for forgotten supplies. Can you think of an activity where the stat penalties WOULD kick in? I guess if he went on another non-linked adventure, or just pursued non-quest activities in the city for 24 hours or longer. He has been warnnd that when the quest kicks in he must pursue it or face penalties.

Example: If the atoning spell-less cleric PC runs out of cure potions after battling some dungeon beasts while on the quest is he allowed to travel 2 days to the nearest town to re-stock (and 2 days back to the dungeon) or would this be seen as NOT obeying the geas/quest and thus incurring the stat penalties. Or what happens if the PC decides a levitation potion would help, is he then allowed to go back and get one? Or if he encounters a strange monster may he return home and do research on the monster through an NPC or library, thus delaying achieving the goal of the quest by 2-4 days etc etc??? It seems like it's up to the DM. Background: As DM, I have warned the party ahead of the quest including the quested individual that they are going into the wilderness and may be there for at least a week to complete the quest.

Erkenbard the Eyeful wrote:

Nox Aeterna wrote:

Depends on what you have already build in the story.

For example if it is the temple of a god related to this kind of stuff and such, maybe you could have multiple walls that depict the dead comming back to live or could be carvings on an item, maybe they find a journal that gives hints to such pratices taking place in there.

In the end, there are ways to do it, but you must give further info on the whole situation there mate.

You've given me a great idea with the carvings. Thanks. Sorry I can't go into detail but there is an outside chance that one of the players may read this thread. I have already blurred my initial description to throw such accidental peeking off scent.

Fair enough. Do keep in mind the 3 hint rule if you arent being direct about it, otherwise your player might not catch the drift.

Thanks for the Three Clue Rule mention. I didn't even know about that excellent rule advice. I had included two pretty obvious clues, but I think a third will not go amiss!

Depends on what you have already build in the story.

For example if it is the temple of a god related to this kind of stuff and such, maybe you could have multiple walls that depict the dead comming back to live or could be carvings on an item, maybe they find a journal that gives hints to such pratices taking place in there.

In the end, there are ways to do it, but you must give further info on the whole situation there mate.

You've given me a great idea with the carvings. Thanks. Sorry I can't go into detail but there is an outside chance that one of the players may read this thread. I have already blurred my initial description to throw such accidental peeking off scent.

One of my players, an elf, can be defeatist in attitude. His ally, a human, will probably be killed next session (don't ask why; it is a plot thing) and I am concerned the elf will just give up and return to the town. However, a Raise Dead device is located a little further on in the dungeon. If the elf does not give up he may be able to discover it. (And Raise Dead is unavailable in the town) What kind of hints should I drop about there still being hope without outright telling him that there is a raise dead device there? How do I phrase it? I've written this lengthy scenario and finally my wellspring of creativity has run dry so any ideas would be welcome. Finally, if nothing works and he walks away, would you say he only has himself to blame? or should I be to blame for not directing him more.