Krell's page

How long is a complete battle phase?

James stated earlier in the thread that it wasn’t a case of parallel design, but a purposeful decision. As I wrote, sometimes more isn’t better. Having 100% of the couples and 2/3 of the allied NPCS be LGBT strikes me strangely. I’d have the same criticism if 100% of the couples and 2/3 of the allied NPCs were ½ dragons. I recall James Jacobs lamenting that in Red Hand of Doom he was required to have a plethora of half dragons, something he felt had been overdone. He was right, in the early days of 3rd Ed they were the cool new kids and showed up far too enough. Dungeon magazine also had them on a list of items they didn’t want to see in submissions, along with necromancer and his undead army. I’m not suggesting that the two couples make LGBT inclusion overdone, but that for this AP it seemed clunky, artificial and that the pair ended up detracting from each other. I’ve read the passionate posts on the topic in a variety of threads and found some quite poignant, but to me it’s akin to ½ dragons.

Occupied with other issues I fell behind on reading the current AP and to catch up took them with me on vacation. I liked the Worldwound Incursion, and while I found the background was overly complex between Anevia and Irabeth I thought they were interesting NPCs. I started the Sword of Valor and upon noting Sosiel and Aron I thought, “Hmm, now a guy couple, seems a bit cliché after the other pair.” It was especially odd since the only couples in the AP were LGBT, no mention of any significant other for Horgus and Aravashnial broke up with his girlfriend. This however spoiled neither the AP nor my vacation. It wasn’t until several days after returning and addressing the usual post vacation minutia that out of curiosity I checked to see if there was a thread on the topic. Indeed there were, including some offended, “Cancel my subscription” posts. I’m certainly not offended, but having the only couples in the AP be LGBT seemed forced and diminished them, either pair would have be more interesting without the other. Paizo’s effort to be inclusive was clunky, they forgot that if a little is good more isn’t necessarily better.

I was rereading in prepration of running module and couldn't puzzle out how the PCs re-enter the Agronach and reach area 11 to confront Helrun. Pages 24-25 note 2 entrances on the back of the beast, which I suspect are the two sets of stairs between 6 and 11, that can be accessed by flying or climbing or leaping down from Glimmerhold when the thing is climbing up. Once inside however there doesn't appear to be any internal access into 11. Are the PCs expected to hack their way in? Teleportation is out due to the dim lock. Not having a viable route after scaling/flying/falling and possibly suffering the two 4d12+20 attacks doesn't seem quite right, is it some sort of oversight?

I was rereading in prepration of running module and couldn't puzzle out how the PCs re-enter the Agronach and reach area 11 to confront Helrun. Pages 24-25 note 2 entrances on the back of the beast, which I suspect are the two sets of stairs between 6 and 11, that can be accessed by flying or climbing or leaping down from Glimmerhold when the thing is climbing up. Once inside however there doesn't appear to be any internal access into 11. Are the PCs expected to hack their way in? Teleportation is out due to the dim lock. Not having a viable route after scaling/flying/falling and possibly suffering the two 4d12+20 attacks doesn't seem quite right, is it some sort of oversight?

I was rereading in prepration of running module and couldn't puzzle out how the PCs re-enter the Agronach and reach area 11 to confront Helrun. Pages 24-25 note 2 entrances on the back of the beast, which I suspect are the two sets of stairs between 6 and 11, that can be accessed by flying or climbing or leaping down from Glimmerhold when the thing is climbing up. Once inside however there doesn't appear to be any internal access into 11. Are the PCs expected to hack their way in? Teleportation is out due to the dim lock. Not having a viable route after scaling/flying/falling and possibly suffering the two 4d12+20 attacks doesn't seem quite right, is it some sort of oversight?

Loaded the Jade Regent sheet to my netbook which runs XP and has Excel 2007. Works fine. My desktop with 7 and Excel 2010 still has the feat drop down issue.

Great work! I have Excel 2010 and in the Jade Regent 1.3 the feat drop down is only mobility and morale. The Roots Excel does seem to be Ok however.

I will be running Scarwall soon. Any thoughts on the effect of Scarwall's spirit trapping on a paladin's weapon bond. It states it is a celectial spirit, seems that if Zellara can be rent and absorbed that some minor spirit would also be vulnerable.

For spell trigger/completion items it's clear-SR applies. It seems however that the wondrous category would need case by case adjudication then. I'm surprised that the rules seem silent on the topic, or that the answer is so well hidden.

For items like scrolls, wands and staffs that actually contain spells it's clear that if SR Yes is noted in the spell description then the user must pierce the target's SR. The bulk of wondrous items however often have effects which, while similar, are different than a standard spell. Is SR applicable in those cases based on the spell(s) used to enchant the item or do such effects not allow SR. Examples would be the scare effect of pipes of haunting, the dazing effect of a robe of scintillating colors or even a fireball form a necklace of fireballs.

The Ganji Doll is basically a curse so break enchantment should be able to remove the connection with a successful CL check vs. DC 17 (11 + CL 6 of the doll).

Personally, I'd think about if the item served its purpose in harassing the PC or if you are trying to make a point of some kind (maybe fueling the PCs hatred against a BBEG) and rule accordingly.

I was leaning that way already, but it's an odd case and wanted a 2nd opinion. Thanks for the input.

A player who is being tormented via a Ganji Doll had break enchantment cast upon himself in an effort to prevent further pain. Would that, or anything else, be able to sever the link between the target and doll?

A player who is being tormented via a Ganji Doll had break enchantment cast upon himself in an effort to prevent further pain. Would that, or anything else, be able to sever the link between the target and doll?

In a recent product there was a sidebar on a natural armor amulet that used the wearer's life force in the crafting. It was easier to make but inflicted a penalty if it were ever lost, since a bit of life essence was lost with it. I have a vivid recollection of reading the sidebar, but can't locate the actual reference and my inability is festering like a splinter in my mind. If anyone can direct me to this elusive bit of info it would be a great relief.

Krell wrote:

I've been combing my books, unsuccessfully, for the reference on a feat or trait. The mechanic was that by setting aside a certain amount of gold that the person would then be able to produce the equivalent value of item(s) when he desired. The 'stock', represented by a gold piece value, could be replenised when a city was visited. Ring any bells?

Isn't that a class ability of the pathfinder chronicler?

Kamelguru-yes that's it. It also explains why I couldn't find it on my feat/trait index since it's a class ability. Thanks to all for their input. On the occasions I've called on the Paizo community they've never disappointed.

Thanks again, much gnashing of teeth avoided!

I've been combing my books, unsuccessfully, for the reference on a feat or trait. The mechanic was that by setting aside a certain amount of gold that the person would then be able to produce the equivalent value of item(s) when he desired. The 'stock', represented by a gold piece value, could be replenised when a city was visited. Ring any bells?

Joana, thanks for the thread. My initial search fu was inadequate. It clarifies things a bit. I'll stress the tangled nature of the place and possible dragon attack if they try to race around too much.

Generally the size of the buildings are always exaggerated on a city map so extrapolating from the floor plans yields inaccurate numbers. If you made the calculations on the academy of the arts, which is 130' wide, a cm on the city map would be 130'. The entire city would then be 1600' across-pretty small. Even if hampered by terrain to the max of 1/3 speed due to rubble and undergrowth the PCs can manage 20' r or 200' per min. Flying PCs could cross the entire city in a bit over a minute. Just doesn't feel very satisfying and makes it difficult to cultivate the fog of war that the adventure is supposed to have.

Any suggestions on the scale for the city? I counldn't locate one on either the real ruined version or the intact echo.

Cpt! Thanks for highlighting that to me. I was thrown off by the lack of any mention of the lodge on pages 7-16 and didn't associate Sharrowsmith's Exports with the Nantambu lodge when scanning the 'Where secrets sleep' section. Now that I've completely read the entry it is indeed quite clear. I also like your take that the lodge serves as more of a training facility than a base for exploration.

Is there any information on the Nantambu lodge? The presence of an active lodge there seems to contradicted by the text in the Mwangi entry which notes, "A pathfinder able to establish a new lodge on the periphery of the Mwangi expanse would achieve great renown and influence..." Nantambu is indeed well located. Additionally the now inactive lodge in Kalabuto, much further to the south, was noted as the base from which expeditions into the Mwangi were launched. Any clarification available?

On further thought, I'd probably say that a tentacle hit causes the tentacle to retract into its portal and be replaced by a new portal, unless the tentacle's got ahold of a PC. That way the PCs REALLY don't know what they're fighting and might start worrying that the monster at the other end has an infinite number of tentacles...

Ohhh, that would be very funny, "Gah! There's no end to these things and we can't seem to chop through them!"

In which case you can have the tentacles attack anyone on the map. I'd go ahead and just mark the tentacles with tokens or something and allow PCs to attack those tentacles as if they were all monsters... but not separate monsters. They all share the same hit point pool.

OK, that'll catch them unawares, No expects the 283 HP tentacle(s)!

Like Atrocious I'm puzzled about Drexinis's transformation. Also, despite re-reading the Feasting Damnation on p 20 I'm still uncertain how that combat would execute. It seems that only the tentacles of the creature actually appear (unless it opts to plane shift in), but they don't have any HP or AC info, although it is noted they re grow in 1 week if severed so they appear to be attackable. How do the PCs fight it if it remains in the Abyss? It's noted that a DC 20 will can allow a PC to return to the material from the Abyss, can a PC will themselves through to attack it? The imagery of the battle is cool, but I'm wondering how it would work mechanically.

PHB p 58 right column #4 makes it clear that HP are increased based on the new con score.

Big fan of Lord of the Scarlet Tide. It takes place in the neighborhood too, Narwell.

You can't go wrong with the fire shield feedback effect. Last campaign had a dragon shaman and making the foe with every melee attack adds up quickly. His was elec which probably fewer creatures have resistance vs than fire, but yours should still be very impressive at low and mid levels.

This is a whole vicious cycle: PCs get more hits, PCs then feel they need more/better healing, casters using direct spell damage now do even 'less' so they complain to increase it in some fashion, go back to start. Since I'm not in favor of Hp inflation I don't see a need to increase healing.

I've found that the PCs generally chose languages like goblin, orc etc just to avoid the problem you encountered. What, if any other than common, did the party speak? As another poster noted, used primarily to read old texts, tongues is for diplomacy with the Xorn king. I wouldn't alter the level or tinker with the spell.

I confess I've been puzzled by the folk who've noted that they plan to wait until the edition is decided before joining. I would encourage anyone interested, OGL or 4E proponents, to contribute now and help shape the project. If 'your' edition 'loses' Wolfgang will refund your donation, or if you desire it can be shifted to the 'winning' edition. Kudos to Wolfgang for setting up a no lose situation for the patrons. While I hope the OGL is victorious the scope of the project is such that I'd even consider financing 4E (which is a hard thing for me to write). Become involved as little or much as you desire. Even the ideas that aren't used in the actual project may spur possibilities. Really, much fun for everyone involved.

Some brain storming already in progress making it a good time to get on board and help shape the adventure. Wolfgang's last update of 3.5 vs 4E for the project was a dead heat.

I agree with KnightErrant. Cityscape was the weakest, a few tibits of value but not many. Dungeonscape was a mixed bag, but worth getting. Forstburn was the best and Stormwrack is also very useful.

Krome, hope that it works out for you. Being away from the wife will doubtlessly be difficult, but it may be a good return on investment.

Fake Healer, thanks for that link. Some impressive plans on the site.

Jason,
Thanks for the swift reply-one of the many good things about Paizo. Really looking forward to running this, albeit modified, in my Greyhawk campaign. As the PCs just finished the Misgivings, Bloodsworn Vale will be something completely different and allow the ranger to really shine.

Just getting ready to run W1 when I noted that there are 2 'A6' locations in Fort Thorn. I did a quick search but didn't note that it had been previously addressed. One is the Boar's Bones (the larger one?), anyone have insight as to what the other one is.

The whole 'the alarm is raised everyone runs' off doesn't make too much sense either. It could easily be a ruse (illusions, summoned monsters, PCs who then dim away) to draw defenders into a trap or away from an area. I generally take it to mean that when an alarm is raised, unless there's a good reason to leave their current area, they stay there prepared for trouble.

Ahh.... "North of Narborel", a Chris Perkins adventure from Dungeon #49.

That was a pretty good one. If Treasure of Chimera Cove is even close to the same, it'll be a great adventure. Can't wait for it.

I think it's even older than that, Can Seapont be Saved was in Dragon #75 Jul 1983. Good times, a TPK there as I recall.

I've been denied the privilege of logging on also, for the past three days. Mails sent to webmaster, but no response yet.

Favored enemy damage for rangers in 3.0 was restricted to creatures that could be struck with a critical/sneak attack. In 3.5 it was altered to untyped damage. In 3.0 undead wasn't a good choice for a ranger since you only gained the assorted bonuses on skill checks and not the damage.

I've never had an issue having a PDF printed at my local Staples. I only have one printed so its clear that I'm not selling them-they're for my personal use. I'm surprised that there would be an issue for me to have a hardcopy 'back-up' created. I would think it's akin to having a second copy of the PDF on a disk for archival purposes.

You could purchase the PDF and take it to your local Staples or such. There it can be printed double sided and bound with a clear front and opaque back cover. That's what I do with the bulk of my PDFs. For D0 the cost will be modest.

Keep them separate, I've little use for the new Dungeon and once it actually cost me coin -no use.

None whatsoever, alas.

Before we can really tackle this... we need to be in a place where we have the free time to go back and fix things right. We just recently got our schedule caught up, but that doesn't mean we're AHEAD of schedule; it's more important now than ever to keep things on schedule and that means not much time is left over for other projects.

James,

Otto

Unfortunately, there are a lot of bits of missing info and errors on the map. And unfortunately, it'll probably be a while before we have a chance to correct them, unless Mike wants to step in here and offer some advice. But that's not as easy as it seems, because Mike's no longer working at Paizo (he's moved on to a different career), and while he does continue to post here now and then, I'm not sure he has the time to post huge errata lists for products. Nor do I expect him to; it's not his job, after all!

Further complicating things is that Darkmoon Vale went through its production cycle without ever passing through my hands until the very end... it was handled, primarily, by the module editing team. We've since reorganized the department, lost a few employees, and gained a few employees, but as a result no one at Paizo right now is super familiar with Guide to Darkmoon Vale, and therefore the amount of time it would take to research everything and place everything on the map isn't just a matter of looking at a first draft map turnover or asking someone over the cube walls or drawing upon personal experience. The errors in Scarwall, for example, are in a product I'm VERY familiar with, and I (and the author, who noticed the thread) were both able to zip in there and offer corrections quickly. We don't currently have the resources to do the same at the drop of a hat for "Guide to Darkmoon Vale,"...

Any progress on placing the 'missing' sites on the map?

Could be a good question for the KQ sage.

James,
Thanks for any efforts in addressing the deficiencies in the guide. I can hold my breath until the end of Aug/Beg of Sep-I'd much rather have it right later, than wrong but today. D0/1/1.5 and CoT were so good that in comparison the guide was a disappointment. Not that it's unsalvageable, but folk should just be aware that, as written, the guide has some significant issues. I'll refrain from any additional posts to the thread until the beg of Sep. No need to belabor the issue.

While I would agree that this book is probably the current low point in Paizo's products, I would however agrue that this book far exceeds both the Book of Nine Swords and Races of Faerun in both usefulness and in quality.

While I don't use Bo9S or Races of Faerun it's an apples vs oranges comparison. This was billed as a guide book, not a splat book. I've written numerous times that I really liked the flavor, but the cartography issue is huge to me. If you look at the Scarwall thread you'll note a posting of errata, missing doors and such, was promptly made. I'm much more likely to add doors that appears to be missing without any dithering or official 'word' since the PCs are only going to be in the dungeon once it really doesn't matter if it's 'right.' Guessing about the location of larger sites, eg towns and ruins, is a problem because subsequently moving them to the 'correct' location damages the verisimilitude of the world. This could easily occur if additional modules are set in the Vale. If the big map was the players map that's fine, but the smaller maps in the book should be sufficiently detailed for me as the DM to accurately be able to locate each site. By accurately, I mean approximately x miles NW of Oldfen, a laser guided missile isn't necessary :).

Everyone has different priorities when it comes to products, the accuracy of the maps and their integration to text is one of mine. I'm still optimistic that Mike or someone else will be able to provide the necessary info to tie the text to a location on the map. If that doesn't occur the product will likely not see use and I'd rate it extremely substandard both for the initial omissions and the lack of errata.