I don't have much advice to offer about making NPCs more resistant to casters.
On the crafting side of things, you control their access to resources. If they are crafting a lot of items without going to port, then maybe they are running low on the items they need. Perhaps they only have one more sheet of parchment suitable for writing a scroll or one more potion bottle. Those items are easy to come by in most decent sized ports (I would assume), but it still puts in a small bump in their crafting.
When it gets to wondrous items and magic weapons and armor, you could require more powerful and specific crafting items. Perhaps that Cloak of Protection needs half a dozen owlbear feathers to craft it. It's not a big block to crafting, and the occasional bit of loot on captured ship or monsters they kill on islands they visit to bury their chests can allow them to craft a few things.
You can go into depth of what kind of reagents are needed to make more powerful or specific enchantments, or just handwave it as is already the case within rules (pretty sure crafters don't just burn gold to make things magic).
If so, drop diplomacy entirely. Knights were not diplomats. Historically, they were just brutal soldiers that generally owned land and could afford great armor that kept them alive.
As for weapons, get rid of the bow. Peasants and mercenaries were the ones that used the bows to free up the knights for other duties. Heavy focus on maces and similar crushing weapons would also be common. Swords are pretty much useless against plate armor (and even mail to a large extent).
I know that reality and rules do not mesh up. When it comes to game play, a fighter or cavalier is the closest Pathfinder has to a fantasy knight.
Do I really need to go from generals to specifics for every possible meaning of what I was trying to express so that I don't have to defend my points down to the minutiae?
Okay, so perhaps I was not as eloquent as I could have been with my statements. CorvusMask said it quite well earlier, they can be killed but, within the Pathfinder system (and the official Pathfinder setting of Golarion), only through plot devices as opposed to mechanical rules.
What's more is that we seem to even agree on the point of the matter! Nothing is invulnerable in Pathfinder or any other D20 system I know of simply because of GM power and plot devices, but some are invulnerable using the mechanics provided to play the game (like Golarion deities). So I have no idea why you had to prove me wrong when I fundamentally agree with you.
As a side note, I assume the reference to beheading a god to kill it is about Ydersius. But, Ydersius is not a dead god, not really. The PCs don't even technically fight Ydersius in that AP, but an avatar of him that is only vulnerable because it is not fully regenerated and divine. Even 'killing' it only sends its body back into the Darklands (and below), which it can come back from. It's a similar situation to Cthulhu in Pathfinder. You 'kill' it but really all you do is delay it for a few hundred or thousand years until someone else tries to bring them back again. They never truly die and stay dead.
This was far more time that I ever expected to spend trying to explain myself on this thread. Perhaps I'll just not bother in the future if I have to worry about writing my posts as if I have a panel of rules-lawyers waiting in the wings to nit-pick them.
The end result is that gods (and in this case the spawn of a god) cannot be killed in Pathfinder.
This, uh... this is demonstrably untrue in-canon, more than once.
I'm kind of sad that I have to point out that, if one followed my post to the end, I mentioned very specifically that they can only be killed by GM fiat.
Printed in Bestiary 1 in 2011, Bestiary 6 had indeed not yet been discovered.
That is irrelevant. Book printing dates are not an acceptable method of bypassing the Tarrasque's complete immunity to suppression of its regeneration.
The end result is that gods (and in this case the spawn of a god) cannot be killed in Pathfinder. The Tarrasque is specifically immune to all attempts to suppress its regenerative abilities. This includes the abilities of significantly weaker creatures.
Short of GM fiat, you cannot kill the Tarrasque by design.
The Memitim's terminal aura suppresses Regeneration and Fast Healing. The Tarrasque's Regeneration specifically cannot be suppressed by anything.
Pretty sure that makes it immune to the terminal aura. Standard regeneration can be suppressed, but the Tarrasque has a significantly more powerful level of regeneration, granted by a god, that I would be willing to bet can't be suppressed by some mere petty outsider.
I was stuck on Eunna for a while yesterday. Best I could come up was a small group that was opposed to relationships that could not produce children. A cult of blood sacrifice makes things a lot more interesting.
Draseriss might have a good few as well. Apocalyptic cults and necromancy cults (may or may not be overlap). Standard but makes for fun possibilities.
I never thought about a hunting cult that may target sentient beings for a nature deity. It's an interesting proposal. I am still doing an anti-civilization cult though, I think it's just fun. And ties in well with a cult for Edall that want to turn the world into an ecumenopolis.
@Amanuensis, that may become a thing. Thank you for the idea
I have been writing my own campaign setting for quite some time and I'm polishing off the 6th iteration of my list of deities. One thing that I have been working with is the idea of removing alignment entirely from deities.
Alignment still does exist normally for everything else, but deities are far too powerful and mysterious for mortal ethics to be used for the gods. They are all working toward goals that are so long term that even something as ancient as a dragon or a lich would last a mere fraction of a single move in a god's plans.
As such, I will be allowing players to have any alignment and worship any deity they want to. Deities do typically attract mortals of certain alignments, but religious dogma is still up to interpretation for individual mortals. This leads to different sects of the same deity that have vastly different views and alignments.
For example, the god of war may have a LG/LN sect that views war as something that must be fought honorably, with no advantages taken over their opponents. A CN sect would likely take advantage of anything they can. A CE sect would most likely stoop to deception and mass murder in order to begin wars between kingdoms and groups for the express purpose in fighting in them because they like killing.
Id love for some advice and critiques on my deity list, as well as ideas for potential sects for my gods. Specifically I'd love to see ideas of how to corrupt the deities portfolios and create potentially evil cults for these gods.
Deity List:
Varangian
God of Battle, Strife, and War
Domains: Destruction, Glory, Protection, Strength, War
Favored Weapon: Battleaxe
Eunna
Goddess of Agriculture, Family, the Sun
Domains: Community, Earth, Healing, Plant, Sun
Favored Weapon: Sickle
Edall
God of Cities, Invention, Law, and Wealth
Domains: Artifice, Community, Nobility, Rune, Trickery
Favored Weapon: Warhammer
Aavith
God of Honor, Justice, Redemption, and Virtue
Domains: Fire, Glory, Protection, Strength, Sun
Favored Weapon: Bastard Sword
Ellerin
Goddess of the Heavens, History, Knowledge, Magic, and Prophecy
Domains: Destruction, Knowledge, Magic, Darkness, Void
Favored Weapon: Quarterstaff
Harean
Goddess of Birth, Healing, Illness, and Medicine
Domains: Charm, Death, Healing, Madness, Protection
Favored Weapon: Morningstar
Sylys
God/Goddess of Art, Beauty, and Music
Domains: Air, Charm, Glory, Luck, Water
Favored Weapon: Scimitar
Iros
God of Illusion, Mystery, Secrets, and Subterfuge
Domains: Darkness, Knowledge, Luck, Trickery, Travel
Favored Weapon: Dagger
Draseriss
Goddess of the Afterlife, Death, Dreams, and Time
Domains: Darkness, Death, Madness, Repose, Void
Favored Weapon: Halberd
Udena
Goddess of Nature and the Wilds
Domains: Animal, Earth, Plant, Water, Weather
Favored Weapon: Longspear
Abrisi
Goddess of Change, Companionship, Love, and Pleasure
Domains: Air, Charm, Community, Healing, Liberation
Favored Weapon: Shortbow
Samarand
God of Adventure, Bravery, Freedom, and Luck
Domains: Glory, Luck, Strength, Travel, Trickery
Favored Weapon: Rapier
You don't. No matter how strong you are or how many times you manage to kick him back to R'lyeh, Cthulhu will still be around and will come back again when the stars are right.
You don't kill Cthulhu. You merely delay him for an insignificant amount of time by his standards. Eventually your character will be dead and at that point Cthulhu wins the fight.
If I were to do this, I'd run the rogue like Keyser Soze from the Usual SSuspects. He's not an amazing fighter or anything. His skill all lies in no one knowing who he really is and being afraid of him because of how mysterious he and his organization is.
Whenever the PCs finally think they got him, all they get are their friends and family murdered because the real BBEG is still alive and well and in hiding again.
So I'm working on a new campaign idea and I always like to start by working on the main antagonist of the campaign.
The antagonist is, at this point, something along the lines of a wizard that wants to bring about world peace and order by stripping the souls of people of most of their emotions and individuality and bonding them to golem-like bodies. Without emotions or outward differences in appearance, the antagonist feels that he could structure society to become far more ordered and peaceful.
Right now, I'm looking at the antagonist being something like a high level spellcaster that has bound his soul to a golem, possibly even something as strong as an adamantine golem. However, I have no idea how to create stats for this correctly. Do I build the character like normal and then change his HD to d10s and give him the resistances and defensive abilities of the adamantine golem (not the size though, this body would more resemble the antagonists original form)?
Only problem I see is that you would never know exactly where the AoE is going to land. I could see letting to player ready an action and move, but I wouldn't show him exactly where the blast will land, so a character won't just shift over five feet and miss the dragon fire, but instead have to run far.
Either that or just give them a good bonus on Reflex to avoid for readying the action to avoid it. Something like a +1 for every 5 ft of speed.
This is one reason why I'm looking more for a big boom trap as opposed to a death effect. An explosion doesn't leave a corpse for Speak With Dead or similar spells.
All in all, thanks for the ideas. I think ill go with a nice big boom spell tied to either the opening of the box or removing the documents within.
The party could be commissioned by a government to sail and explore in a particular direction. This gives them sea exploration, land exploration and play up the mysteriousness of new lands and cultures.
Give the PCs a small ship and crew, designed more for carrying provisions than crew and long distance sailing. Then they can be set free to explore.
Its be neat, but I doubt I could convince the PCs to assassinate the guy. By this point in the story, they already would have helped to remove a real despot from power. Getting them to believe the guy next door is also a cruel despot would be reaching quite a bit.
I think I may go with a suitcase bomb of some kind. Maybe a very nice wooden box rigged to cast a high level Fireball when its opened. Or a bigger boom spell if I can find a nice one.
Yeah, the bomb, or whatever it turns out to be specifically, will be carried and delivered by the PCs, implying that they are involved with the assassination.
And even if they can show that they didn't do it on purpose, they will still want to know who did give them the bomb or find proof that that person wanted the city lewder dead. An angry mob won't be sated until they have blood.
Ah, I see. I misunderstood. And here I was hoping that Explosive Runes had a cap put on how much it can be stacked.
I might go with a combination of Rynjin and LazarX's ideas. Not sure if I want the PCs present when people start dying, with maybe a magical and super virulent disease that kills within hours, or just a bomb that the PCs deliver without knowing it's a bomb.
Rynjin, I did know about the Explosive Runes Suitcase Nuke but I wanted to avoid it because I didn't really agree with the idea of stuffing a box with a thousand or so runes and having them all go off at once. But did you say that they capped the damage it can do at 100? If so, I can deal with that. Mostly I don't want super massive Ex. Runes nukes to work so PCs don't copy that.
Strayshift, the point is that the PCs wouldn't do it. It's not about money or treasure, but it's an obviously evil act that would result in major alignment changes. Sounds like you may be playing with a bunch of murderhobos. Also, if they a tally did it there would be no reason to frame them.
Thenovalord, they may be able to prove their innocence to a specific person with magic, but it's a lot harder to convince a city of people out for blood. And magic can be used to lie just as easily as to show the truth. More, I'm looking to make this a major twist where the guy the PCs thought was good turns out to be a major minion of the BBEG and betrays them, putting them on the defensive and on the run.
Otherwise, thanks for the ideas guys. Writing my blocks out helps me work past them.
I want to assassinate someone and frame the PCs for it and have the PCs carry the trap in, unaware that they are carrying a death trap.
The PCs will be acting effectively as trusted emissaries on a diplomatic mission carrying official documents from on leader to another. The trap can either be in or on a diplomatic case or on the documents themselves. My first thought was Explosive Runes on the documents, giving the appearance that the PCs blew up the leader with a spell and leaving no physical trace of the documents that contained the trap, but Explosive Runes don't deal much damage. I would love something that makes a very big bang and is likely to destroy itself too but won't level the entire building and murder the PCs as well.
For the campaign I'm currently working on, one of the major villains is going to assassinate the leaders of another city but does not want to be anywhere near the effect when it happens. In fact, this villain is planning on using this assassination to implicate and get rid of the PCs.
I'm not sure what to use to kill this city leader though. I would like something capable of killing him outright, preferably with no save or miss chance. If it can take out a good area that'd be better. Also, I would want it to be carried by good PCs, so it cant be something like a scroll of gate to pull in an angry demon to rip everyone apart.
I already know about Explosive Runes, but 6d6 (average of 21 damage) seems a little low to be full proof. Does anyone have any better ideas?
If you wanted to do a spear and shield combo, you could try trident and shield and just describe your trident as a spear. It is a one handed martial weapon with almost the same stats as a spear, including brace special quality, but lower critical multiplier and range increment.
The lack of good shield and spear combo has always been a small problem for me. I tried to design a spear to fill that niche but it pretty much came back as a trident. Making the regular spear martial or exotic seemed to be the only way to balance out dropping it down to 1 handed.
My guess would be multiple attacks can still do damage even if some miss. Save or suck spells generally don't do much if the enemy saves. If you can use a spell that the enemy cant save against, isn't that better than a spell they can save against?
I'd love to see a return of Assassin spellcasting personally. They had it in 3.5, only 4 levels of it and a very small spell list but useful for their line of work.
That and I remember somewhere there being an Assassin spell (not from a core 3.5 book) that let them make their enemies hearts explode from a distance. That's just cool.
I think putting the threshold for a serious injury is too low. After a few levels, you'll find you're lobbing off limbs of PCs on a regular basis.
I pulled out one of my old characters, a Dwarf Barbarian that was not at all optimized. By level 9, he would force a Fort save for serious injury with every hit, having a +19 to damage with his Greataxe with rage and power attack, which he used during all combats. Now, if you got an optimized character, this would probably happen around level 3 or 4.
Throw on crit damage and my level 9 could deal enough damage that even the Tarrasque would need to roll a 29 to save against serious injury.
Also, it would increase the gap between finesse fighting and two handed fighting, even though finesse was all about finding the weak points in the enemies defense.
Perhaps use this as an alternative to crit damage? Instead of straight 1d6 bleed or 1d6 rounds or an effect, reduce to d4s and make it (Critical Multiplier of the weapon -1)d4s of the certain effect. For example, a Rapier crit to the Head would deal 1d4 bleed and a Greataxe would result in 2d4 bleed.
It would help to balance this around all the weapons, although it would be great if there were more different effects between weapon types and hit areas.
You may want to look over the Critical Hit deck for ideas.
And the whole, expanding your spell list debacle created by Eldritch Heritage and Paragon Surge.
That ruling alone prevents this from working. As the fighter has no spell list, he cannot cast any arcane spell.
Certainly, he can use his ability to cast any of his own arcane spells, but his class does not offer them.
That's a fine house rule. One I am sure those who wish to deny this ability to their players would enforce. Unfortunately, it is not a part of the ability, as it has no mention of spell lists. It only requires those who are prepard casters to have it memorized or those that are spontaneous casters to have it as a known spell. Those are both behind IF statements, and since neither apply to the fighter, s/he is not restricted to those gates and therefore uses a different method (mentioned in the same paragraph: any arcane spell).
The way this reads to me reminds me of how the local theater did seating, with evens on one side and odds on the other.
If you have an Even ticket, go up the left stairs.
If you have an Odd ticket, go up the right stairs.
If you don't have either ticket, you don't go up the stairs.
It seems to me that this is the jist of the argument, with one side saying the fighter can't go up the stairs because he has no ticket (spell list) and the other side saying he can go through a third way (through the wall) because not having a ticket means he is not restricted by the first two if statements and the third one is not expressly written.
That would make sense if there were only ever two casting systems, past, present, and future. Unfortunately, the wording in the book leaves open the possibility that there may be more than two casting systems. When you use odd and even, there isn't ever another option.
Well, past and future are irrelevant.
As of now though, there are only two forms of spell casting, prepared and spontaneous. Sure, some are given in different forms such as the Alchemist extracts, but all are variations on one of the two basic themes of spell casting. Because there are only two forms of spell casting illustrated in the Pathfinder rules, the analogy holds.
If I am wrong about this, what is the official term for this third form of spell casting and where would that be found in the books?
And the whole, expanding your spell list debacle created by Eldritch Heritage and Paragon Surge.
That ruling alone prevents this from working. As the fighter has no spell list, he cannot cast any arcane spell.
Certainly, he can use his ability to cast any of his own arcane spells, but his class does not offer them.
That's a fine house rule. One I am sure those who wish to deny this ability to their players would enforce. Unfortunately, it is not a part of the ability, as it has no mention of spell lists. It only requires those who are prepard casters to have it memorized or those that are spontaneous casters to have it as a known spell. Those are both behind IF statements, and since neither apply to the fighter, s/he is not restricted to those gates and therefore uses a different method (mentioned in the same paragraph: any arcane spell).
The way this reads to me reminds me of how the local theater did seating, with evens on one side and odds on the other.
If you have an Even ticket, go up the left stairs.
If you have an Odd ticket, go up the right stairs.
If you don't have either ticket, you don't go up the stairs.
It seems to me that this is the jist of the argument, with one side saying the fighter can't go up the stairs because he has no ticket (spell list) and the other side saying he can go through a third way (through the wall) because not having a ticket means he is not restricted by the first two if statements and the third one is not expressly written.
I have the feeling that either the first necklace remains active until removed and all other magical items that would occupy the next slot would be inactive or all would be inactive until only a single neck slot item is being worn.
I'm working through designing a villain for a new campaign and found a Bard archetype that fits rather well with how I picture him, the demagogue. However, I'm having trouble figuring out how he can use his higher level Demagogue abilities on large groups of people, which is how the archetype seems to be pointed toward doing.
Relevant Abilities:
Gather Crowd:
Gather Crowd (Ex): At 5th level, the celebrity is skilled at drawing an audience to his performances. If he is in a settlement or populated area, he can shout, sing, or otherwise make himself noticed in order to attract an audience to his impromptu stage. The size of the crowd depends on the local population, but typically is a number of people equal to 1/2 the bard’s class level × the result of the bard’s Perform check. The crowd gathers over the next 1d10 rounds. If the bard fails to engage the crowd (such as by performing, kissing babies, trying to use fascinate, and so on), it disperses over the next 1d10 rounds.
Incite Violence:
Incite Violence (Ex): At 6th level, the demagogue can use his performance to fan the fury of a crowd of people he has fascinated. Using this ability does not disrupt the fascinate effect, but does require a standard action to activate (in addition to the free action to continue the fascinate effect). The bard selects a number of targets equal to his level, who must make Will saves (DC 10 + 1/2 the bard’s level + the bard’s Charisma modifier) or be affected by rage for a number of rounds equal to the bard’s level. The bard indicates who is the intended target of violence (either after using this ability or as part of the performance leading to it) and the enraged members of the crowd immediately attack the target if possible. The target does not need to be present (“kill the king” is a suitable choice) and can be an object instead of a person (“destroy the prison!” is likewise appropriate). Other members of the crowd may follow suit, though they do not gain the benefits of rage. This is a sound-based effect and is affected by countersong. If two or more bards are attempting to direct the crowd against different targets, they must make opposed Charisma checks, with the crowd following the directions of the winner.
Righteous Cause:
Righteous Cause (Ex): At 18th level, the demagogue can lift a crowd’s emotions and turn them toward a common purpose. First, he must fascinate the crowd, and then use incite violence without designating a target, at which point he can use righteous cause. Instead of driving the crowd with anger, he fills them with purpose. Fascinated creatures must make Will saves (DC 10 + 1/2 the bard’s level + the bard’s Charisma modifier) to resist. Those who fail are affected by mass suggestion of a plausible idea that lingers with them for one day. Typical uses of this ability are to spark rebellion, overthrow a king, build a beneficial structure such as an orphanage, or donate money to a cause.
Fascinate:
Fascinate (Su): At 1st level, a bard can use his performance to cause one or more creatures to become fascinated with him. Each creature to be fascinated must be within 90 feet, able to see and hear the bard, and capable of paying attention to him. The bard must also be able to see the creatures affected. The Distraction of a nearby combat or other dangers prevents the ability from working. For every three levels a bard has attained beyond 1st, he can target one additional creature with this ability.
It looks like a high level Demagogue could pull in a lot of people (easily hundreds for a high level bard) but could only Fascinate and boost up to Righteous Cause on half a dozen people.
Can the bard use Fascinate on six or seven people and push them up to Righteous Cause, then let those people go and move on to another group to Fascinate without ending and restarting their performance?
I'm thinking having Feyd be a Demagogue Bard. The Incite Violence and Righteous Cause abilities seem to fit with what I had in mind for him, along with plenty of use of Enchantment and Illusion magic.
Either Demagogue Bard or an Enchantment/Illusion specialist Sorcerer.
My current idea is for the PCs to stumble into the plot by looking into disappearing caravans of food and other goods.
The Blue Dragon wants food to be scarce for a period of time in the other two cities. This raises tensions among the common people, although not enough to start a riot over. Think more WWII rationing than famine. Couple real limitations on food with using expendable criminal contacts to waylay food within Port Town and Mine Town with hired goons to attack and capture some between towns. For the out of town goons, I think gnolls would work particularly well, most likely headed by a small group of dragon cultists.
I'm also possibly adding a second blue dragon, a young relation to the BBEG Blue Dragon. One of those that Dragons Revisited mentions are generally manipulated by older blues and try to prove their worth but are generally just used as fodder. Let the PCs encounter it fairly early and defeat it, hopefully making them think the dragon cult was just a red herring and not simply a small sect of a cult that really serves a much older dragon.
From there, they may begin to find references to the dragon cult in the personal affects of other important characters and members of the cult, such as Rabban. He is a member of the cult, but none too smart, picked for his ruthlessness.
Of course, at some point Feyd and the Blue Dragon will realize that the PCs are starting to get a little too close and will set them up to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and marked as villains themselves. Maybe the cult stages a massacre at an outlying village of Mine Town right before the PCs are supposed to show up there. The PCs arrive, look around, and then agents of Mine Town just happen to show up (tipped off of course), see the carnage and naturally blame the PCs.
This puts them on the run for a bit and trying to prove their innocence, possibly tracking down the real killers in the process and finding more information that leads them further on.
I don't suspect that the Blue Dragon will be doing any casting, but I was thinking of building Feyd as a very charismatic class. Bard, sorcerer,possibly inquisitor.
If not him, than the dragon cult will certainly have someone capable of magical influenc.
Boring7, I think you have a good idea of how the region is forming in my mind as well. However, I'm looking more to have farm city be more supplied with water via a large lake or oasis that is fed by a large underground river. This lake has many small outlets that do not make for easy transportation via boat, and the one outlet that does terminates right where port city is.
Also, the dragon's second loyal servant, we will call him Feyd, that kicks Rabban out of power won't be jacking up food prices. I want him to be loved by the people and seen as a liberator. Rabban was only put in power to make the people love whomever kicks him out.
I dig that, but I'm not clear on the timing. He already HAS dictatorial control over one city-state, he needs the other two. Unless Not-Rabban doesn't yet control Farmville, which ash it's own problems. His goal is to have a "good guy" (like Feyd was supposed to pretend to be) roll in and be the good-guy liberator. Good-guy liberators who then go a-conquerin' lost a lot of their luster and shiny patina of goodness.
Unless he who controls the Farms controls the nation naturally. If that's the case Blue Dragon doesn't NEED a war, he just needs Farmville's government to be under his control and seen by interested parties as legitimate.
In my current idea, the Blue Dragon does have effective control of Farm City and has for a decade or less. However, he does not want this Rabban to run the city under his control. Instead, Feyd comes in, ousts Rabban and becomes a popular leader of Farm City.
From there, the Blue Dragon does not plan on conquering the other two. Instead, he uses minions and contacts to make Mine Town think Port Town is planning on war/is ruled by corrupt and murderous despots. Currently, I'm thinking of having the Mine Town leader and spouse assassinated, putting Mine Town on the brink of succession crisis. Instead, Feyd marries one of the potential heirs of Mine Town, both securing a peace between Mine and Farm cities against Port City (fake) aggression and giving the Blue Dragon control of 2 of the cities.
This may seem quite fast, but Feyd is well liked by many people in the area because he sends out a good deal of food to relieve the beginnings of food shortages created by Rabban's despotic rule. Farm City sees him as a liberator and many civilians of the other two cities see him as the man that gave them food that was beginning to get short for everyone but the wealthy and powerful.
After that, the Blue Dragon only has to convince the people of Port Town that he would be a better ruler than the current leaders so Feyd can come in and establish rule over all three cities.
This is where I'm at after all the great ideas Ive read here.
Boring7, I think you have a good idea of how the region is forming in my mind as well. However, I'm looking more to have farm city be more supplied with water via a large lake or oasis that is fed by a large underground river. This lake has many small outlets that do not make for easy transportation via boat, and the one outlet that does terminates right where port city is.
Also, the dragon's second loyal servant, we will call him Feyd, that kicks Rabban out of power won't be jacking up food prices. I want him to be loved by the people and seen as a liberator. Rabban was only put in power to make the people love whomever kicks him out.
I just had a thought of pulling in some intrigue from Dune to start it off.
Make one city already have fallen to the dragon's minions (secretly of course). The ruler in say the farming city is a despot that lives in luxury and squeezes the wealth out of the people, similar to Rabban Harkonnen. He is hated but in total power, and also a puppet of the Blue Dragon BBEG.
Then another puppet of the BBEG comes in, possibly with the help of the PCs, to remove Rabban from power and be seen as a hero to the farming city, the plan that was put in place for Feyd-Rautha on Arrakis.
Eventually Feyd will have to set the PCs up of course to remove them from the public mind as heros as well, possibly framing them as agents of a corrupt rulership in the port city. Feyd pushes the farming city and the mining city together and then takes on the 'corrupt' port city rulers.
With popular support for Feyd, there would be little unrest on his taking power of all three cities. This plan puts a puppet on the throne of this new kingdom and the Blue Dragon BBEG behind the throne and no one knows he's there.
EDIT: Man, this is really helping me work through the problems I had. Thanks everyone.
The mining city may or may not have resources for a military solution. Having iron is one thing, but if they don't have the food to feed the army then weapons and armor are useless. However, if they have mines of precious metals, they'd have a resource that everyone wants, such as gold.
This keeps the port city from going after the mine city as they would lose access to the cities gold and iron until they win or capitulate and resume trade.
I really likes the triangle ideas from both Ms. Pleiades and Weirdo. If the port city controls most of the external trade, including levying taxes on goods produced in the other two city states, it would grow to be the largest of the three (which is how I envisioned it being anyway) but the other cities probably still receive enough income through their trade to stay powerful enough to retain their independence.
The smaller two cities of this triangle would also have a vested interest in keeping the other around because while individually they could be taken over, the threat of the other keeps the larger port city from focusing on either of the smaller cities.
The idea is to take the cool rivalry between the three cities, which would never escalate to war within any short period of time, and for the blue dragon BBEG to create more animosity between them and push them to a war that would not happen.
Also, for the more farming related city, perhaps have it situated on a large lake with relatively few or very small outlets that prevent large scale water trading? That lets them irrigate otherwise useless land but prevents them from bypassing the port city for trade.
I'm working on a new campaign idea and I'm a bit stuck trying to flesh out and identity three cities central to the campaign.
In short, a blue wyrm is plotting to forge its own kingdom from behind the scenes by inciting war between these three independent city states and then positioning a loyal pawn in place to end the wars and unite the cities under the pawn's rule, and the dragon's by extension.
What I'm hoping for is some ideas as to what these three cities may be like to come up with ideas for how the dragon plans to incite these wars. What goods are likely produced, traded, and imported into a region hospitable for a blue dragon. I'm not sure what is generally found in and around the desert regions favored by blue dragons.
I figure each city would have an effective, if not total, monopoly on certain goods or else one would have probably already dominated the others by now. Is this a realistic assumption or am I incorrect in this?
I am very interested in this build, but I think I'm missing something. How does the Slayer flank with itself without Dimensional Savant? The earlier versions of the build didn't have that yet were still saying the build could flank opponents by itself to grant constant Sneak Attack.
I'd scrap the 'standard' DCs for skills for either scaled DCs based on character level or do away with DCs altogether and base success or failure based on the result of the roll and the situation at hand.
If someone rolls a 30 on say Diplomacy on average and it talking with a nobody commoner, then yeah, they will almost always get their way. But maybe you think 30 is not enough to Diplo the BBEG or ally of said BBEG. The DCs will never be set in stone which can be problematic but it gives you a lot more flexibility.
1. Does the NPC have a name?
No: They have no levels in any class and 1HP.
Yes: Continue to 2
2. Is the NPC meant to be a combat encounter?
No: They have no levels in any class and 1HP.
Yes: Continue to 3
3. Is the combat meant to be a challenge?
No: They have a few levels in NPC or PC classes.
Yes: They have an amount of levels in PC classes similar to the PCs.
The way I see it, unless you want the PCs to attack the NPC in the course of the story, you should never worry about class levels or HP. Only important characters in a story should ever have levels in a class and the rest are just background.
I read the OP and all I could think was that we have just encountered the PFRPG equivalent of a social justice warrior.
But back on topic, this is a fantasy game and therefore we do not have to conform to real world equivalents of character classes/races/spells/etc. Some cultural myths of creatures like elves make them out to be tiny, more in line with Pathfinder fey, than the Tolkien inspired elves that D&D has been using since its creation. That doesn't mean that Pathfinder much change to conform, simply that they are using a different idea for what constitutes an elf. The same goes for the witch class and everything else in the game.
I'm currently on my third version of a homebrew adventure path and have run into some idea blocks.
At the beginning of the AP (going from levels 1 to 4~5) the PCs will be in a large city that was the capital city of one part of a now crumbling empire. The new King of this newly formed kingdom has moved to another city and left this large city of about 50,000 to fend for itself.
What would be of great help would be some ideas on size, activities, and organization of the organized crime within the city.
One of the larger organizations is run by a small group of elite persons that are all cultists of Mammon, which will be a source of conflict for the PCs for most of the AP. Other than that, I have very few ideas on size, organization, etc. Thing's that I have few ideas about would be how a high fantasy medieval drug trade would work? How about underground gladiatorial combat?
Ummm...I get the feeling that you have one idea of what a number of those spells are good for and are implying that there are no other methods of utilizing those spells.
Suggestion, Dominate Person, Charm Person, etc. all have many other uses which are probably far more likely to see table use than getting the local tavern wench into the sack. Unnatural Lust is its normal form lasts all of one round and the Headband of Seduction costs 40,000 to push that up to 10 minutes when there are likely far more useful items to purchase.
If you don't like those spells because of their potential use to be creepy toward non-existent people, then don't use them at your table. But please don't think that is the only reason to ever have those spells prepared.
Half-Elf bard with high CHA could easily reach +19 Diplomacy by 2nd level, allowing a 95% chance of moving a Hostile opponent to Unfriendly, allowing them to talk that rampaging group of Orcs into their best friends that would give them their weapons and horses with just a few minutes of conversation.
Racial Heritage and Adopted both seem to be abused in some way to allow characters to gain abilities that are not physically possible for their anatomy. This is one such case.
A human cannot fire two bows at the same time with only two hands. Taking Racial Heritage may allow you to take the traits and feats normally linked to another race, but it won't grow you another pair of functional arms.
If your GM allows this, the best you could do to describe it would be to say that they are holding both bows in one hand and trying to pull the bow strings back with the other. Even if it was physically possible to do this, the arrows fired from those bows would be horribly inaccurate (were I to allow this, I'd probably give it at least a -10 on attack rolls for each arrow).
With Craft: Weapons, Armor, and Cloth or Leather you could probably craft the majority of the weapons, armor and wondrous items that you wanted. I think leather would be overall better as that could be used to include belts, boots, bracers, capes, cloaks, gloves, bags, etc. Sure, some wondrous items are described as cloth, but is a Bag of Holding made of leather that different from one made of cloth?
Ahmotep by redeux has not participated in any online campaigns.
