Maveric28's page

Pathfinder is no longer for me. I'm sorry. I'm out. I wanted to love it but I just don't.

I bought the hardcover pre-order, because they emphasized that it would ONLY be available thru pre-order and if you didn't order early, you WOULD NOT GET ONE. I knew it would only be good for a year, but I still bought one because I love how Paizo came along and rescued my group when D&D 4E came along and (just my group's opinion) "ruined the game." So I bought it mostly out of optimism and gratitude. Now of course my beautiful hardcover is stuffed with about 50 pages of addendums and corrections, and more yet come! ugh... Why did I do this again?

Well... my regular gaming group (about 9 people when everyone shows up) sat down with the monster that Paizo spit out at us and we tried to play 2E. And we tried to love it... we really, really tried. It was an exercise in futility. The rulebook was so badly written, so badly organized, that my players complained frequently about not being able to find needed information. The rule changes seemed arbitrary in many cases, with little or no explanation as to why they were being changed, or what the "fix" was attempting to actually fix. It was rather like watching a train wreck but really trying to enjoy it, but being unable to really enjoy it because, after all, you are in fact inside of a train wreck.

By the 2nd chapter of Doomsday Dawn, we were done. My group had lost interest, I lost two players to frustration, and the remaining ones were only going thru the motions out of loyalty to me. Then a new player commented that a lot of these changes felt like the new edition of D&D. I asked him to clarify, and he cited several new 2E rule instances that seemed to mirror D&D 5E. I checked out D&D 5E for the first time online, and found myself agreeing with my player: it indeed did feel like PF was trying to take several aspects of WotC's 5E and incorporate them into a new PF version. Some of the similarities were just too uncanny to be coincidence.

So... we switched. After 10+ years of riding the Mathfinder train, we are now happily back to our first love. We are now playing D&D 5E and we truly love it... the fluidity, the relatively open concept, the lack of excessive math and number crunching to make effective characters. Not to mention that it's been out for about 3 years now so any wrinkles have more or less been removed already. We love how combat seems to move so much faster now! Where we used to be able to maybe get 2 or 3 encounters run in an evening with Mathfinder, now we can successfully conclude 3 to 4 times as many encounters in the same amount of time! And yet the game doesn't feel diluted or overly simplistic. It's the right level of simplistic.

Anyway I don't want to go into a huge essay on why I love D&D, or what specific issues I have with the new PF rules... here in the messageboards you will easily find dozens of others who make the exact same complaints that I would make. My point is that unfortunately, Pathfinder has lost me. I enjoyed the ride up till now (even though rules bloat and excessive math made high level adventures nightmarish at best). But now due to this overly complicated next version, Pathfinder has lost me as a customer and my entire game group as well. I don't think they'll miss us... there is always balance for such things, and no doubt some other group will step up to buy the products that we will now forsake. I'm just sad that we ended our journey with Pathfinder in a train wreck.

Okay, I posted this in the Paladin Blog thread but it was quickly buried under 700+ posts on whether Paizo was doing right or wrong by not putting non-LG Paladins in the Core.

What I want to know is this: Do Paladins in PF2 retain their detect evil ability? It wasn't mentioned at all, yet this is a class feature that's been around since the very first hardbound edition of AD&D. I don't mind if it's removed, I just want to know ... was it not mentioned in the blog because it's gone, or because it was an oversight, or because it's a selectable option, or what?

Can any designer reply to this question?

Hi there... my group just finished Rise of the Runelords (anniversary edition) and I need something new for them in about three weeks. I've been taking a break as DM for a bit but I'll be expected to start up again soon. I had been planning to start the Wrath of the Righteous as my next big AP but everything I've read about it here in the forums seems negative, so now I'm starting to have second thoughts.

So I'm asking, if you were ME, which AP would you choose to run for my players? Here's what you need to know: 1.) I don't have time to create my own full-blown campaign, (though I'm adept at making tweaks and changes to encounters on the fly to suit my group) so it absolutely HAS to be a Pathfinder adventure path. No home-brew campaigns.
2.) My group consists of 5-6 players (not counting myself), with an average of each of them having 6-10 years experience playing D&D/Pathfinder. Most of them are reasonable to excellent role-players and there are no min-maxers among them, though no one likes playing weak characters. The group enjoys combat mixed in with opportunities for role-play and puzzle/problem solving.
And 3.) We've already played and completed Rise of the Runelords and have previously started (played 1 to 2 chapters) of Second Darkness, Kingmaker, and Carrion Crown. Also I don't own the Skulls & Shackles or the Jade Regent APs.

Suggestions? Which APs do you like best as a GM, and why? For that matter, which ones do you hate to run, and why? I could really use your advice.

this is a weird one, so bear with me. My players have the tendency to mutilate the fallen bodies of all the humanoids they defeat. They smash the faces and remove the jaws to prevent their foes from using Speak With Dead on their fallen, and they chop off the feet to prevent them from being raised as effective zombies or ghouls. I can understand the practicality behind this behavior but seriously... it's creeping me out! Have any other DM's observed similar behavior in their players, and what do you do about it?... allow it? Overlook it? Divert them so how?

I saw something on another board which piqued my interest earlier, a thread about wands, but it wound up going into a tangent about WBL, or Wealth By Level. It got me thinking... There are a lot of different opinions out there about wealth by level, or colloquially "By X level you need to have Y amount of treasure n' magic items." Many seem to feel that if you have less than this amount, you just aren't competitive and the DM is putting the screws to you and your character. Others seem to be more like me, and interpret the WBL as akin to the Pirate's Code: that is to say, they're more like guidelines than actual rules. I'm curious to know if others out there share my views on this, or are the Wealth-By-Level charts considered incontrovertible gospel?

Fellow DMs and some of you more knowledgeable players, what is your position on this?

I need some advice on this, or even an official ruling if possible. A player of mine in our recent campaign is playing a Witch and has selected a scorpion as his familiar. I used the entry in the Bestiary, which said use the Giant Scorpion stats but make it Tiny instead. So to revert the critter from Large to Tiny, I reversed the Monster Advancement tables (lacking Monster Nerfing or Monster Shrinkage tables) to reduce size, and of course applied the general modifiers for Tiny size creatures, but am still looking at a darn peculiar figure.

According to RAW, the Greensting scorpion used for familiar's stats would have a movement speed of 50 ft, 60 ft darkvision and 60 ft tremorsense, a starting AC of 20 (better than a man in full plate!) and a poison attack with an DC of approximately 14!!?? That's a helluva familiar... by 7th level, when wizards might get Improved Familiars of mephits and pseudo-dragons, that scorpion will have an additional +4 AC (total 24) and 9 Int. I must be missing something, there's no way a 1st-level familiar can cruise around at 50 ft move rate with poison, tremorsense, and an AC better than the party's best armored warrior.

Wow, that looks awesome... but the $30 price tag seems awfully steep. The gigantic dragons that Wizard released a few years back (Colossal?) only came in at about $28 to $35 dollars at my local Hobby store, and I can think of many campaigns where I can use a big ole dragon. Gelatinous Cube, though a classic iconic monster from early D&D, seems to be a one-shot wonder. I mean, your players are not likely to come up against GC's in any real quantity, right? The whole fear factor for this particular predator is that one first encounter with them. After that, not so much. Anyway, just my opinion of course, but I think $30 for a 2" miniature that will likely only be used once is quite a bit too much to ask.

Hey all, thought we'd look for a few new players... established game group has been off n' on for last decade or so in Sacramento/Roseville, but "real life" is interfering with some schedules and we find ourselves looking for more players.

We currently have two Pathfinder games, one is a pretty full campaign that goes every other Sunday, approximately 11 or 12 to 6 p.m. The other is an alternating every-other-Saturday campaign, which is being scrapped in favor of a brand new campaign. We currently have 3 solid players (not including the DM) and we prefer 5 or so, so that means we have at least 2 open slots. We're scrapping the old campaign (Shackled City) due to a constant change in casting, so once we have a solid group of players picked out, we'll start a brand new Adventure Path.

Anyone interested? Questions?

There is a lot of confusion around my gaming table about what can be used with what. I've checked the FAQ on the PFd20SRD forum and to my surprise there is very little official FAQ posted on this topic. I've made my own judgment calls during games but find I'm forgetting from session to session what I ruled last time, and it's getting far too inconsistent. So if I could get some official clarification on this topic it would be fantastic.

Can combat maneuvers be used with attacks of opportunity?; i.e. disarm, trip, grapple, etc.

Can various standard action feats be used with attacks of opportunity?; i.e cleave, vital strike, power attack, etc.

Can someone/something with Improved Grab/Grapple or Improved Trip use it as part of an attack of opportunity?

If one has the Combat Reflexes feat, can they do different maneuvers with attacks of opp?; i.e. disarm one opponent, trip another, stab another, etc.

Can Vital Strike or its improved counterparts be used in conjunction with an attack of opportunity? What about with Spring Attack? What about as part of a Cleave? Can it be used with Power Attack or Deadly Aim? Can it be used with Rapid Shot and/or Manyshot?

There are probably other combinations I can't think of at the moment, but these are the ones that are causing my group some friction n' frustration. If these can be answered, it would also probably be useful to add them to the official FAQ. Thanks...

The rules for magical item creation don't seem quite clear to me... the rules state that in order to craft a scroll or wand or whatever, you need to have "access to the spell" you wish to put into the item. Does that mean that a sorcerer could use a scroll or a wand to meet that criteria for spells he does not know but are on the Wizard/Sorcerer spell list and then craft his own wands and scrolls, or even other magical items? What about other classes, could a rogue use a scroll and the Use Magic Device skill to create his own wands, scrolls or wondrous items?

My group is kinda split on this... I would argue that in order to create an item which duplicates a spell or spell-effect, you need to know that spell intimately, i.e. it needs to be part of your daily casting repertoire, and you need to have memorized it (for those who memorize spells anyway) so you can actually CAST the spell during the item creation process. But I've heard some who say all you need is a scroll of that spell, and if you have the Craft Wand feat and enough gold, you can cast the spell from the scroll and create a wand of that spell in its stead.

I need a ruling on this, which scenario is true?

When can you use Vital Strike, and are there any exceptions to the rule? Can you use Vital Strike with an attack of opportunity? What about when you are under the influence of a Haste spell? I'd really welcome some feedback on this, especially from anyone who helped write the rules (i.e. Paizo employees) though all related comments are welcome.

Here's what we know, per RAW (rules as written):

Vital Strike (Combat)
You make a single attack that deals significantly more damage than normal.
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage. Roll the damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together, but do not multiply damage bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), or precision-based damage (such as sneak attack). This bonus damage is not multiplied on a critical hit (although other damage bonuses are multiplied normally).

Attacks of Opportunity
Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down or takes a reckless action. In this case, combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free. These free attacks are called attacks of opportunity.

Provoking an Attack of Opportunity: Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing certain actions within a threatened square.

Making an Attack of Opportunity: An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round.

An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).

Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

Can Vital Strike be used with attacks of opportunity? The rules are not entirely clear to me on this point, so I'm hoping for some feedback from those who write the rules... although all opinions are welcome. Also, what about with Combat Reflexes? What about under the influence of Haste spells?

This is what we know, per RAW:

Vital Strike (Combat)
You make a single attack that deals significantly more damage than normal.
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: When you use the attack action, you can make one attack at your highest base attack bonus that deals additional damage. Roll the damage dice for the attack twice and add the results together, but do not multiply damage bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), or precision-based damage (such as sneak attack). This bonus damage is not multiplied on a critical hit (although other damage bonuses are multiplied normally).

Attacks of Opportunity
Sometimes a combatant in a melee lets her guard down or takes a reckless action. In this case, combatants near her can take advantage of her lapse in defense to attack her for free. These free attacks are called attacks of opportunity.

Making an Attack of Opportunity: An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round.

An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).

Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add your Dexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round. This feat does not let you make more than one attack for a given opportunity, but if the same opponent provokes two attacks of opportunity from you, you could make two separate attacks of opportunity (since each one represents a different opportunity). Moving out of more than one square threatened by the same opponent in the same round doesn't count as more than one opportunity for that opponent. All these attacks are at your full normal attack bonus.

It just came up in our most recent game, the party of 11th level heroes were intruding in a chamber guarded by a stone golem... a few rounds into the fight, the party cleric succeeded in a touch attack with a magic staff that carried Stone Shape in it, and presto-chango, an animated magical guardian becomes a simple block of unmoving basalt. Based on the rules as I read them, I had to let it go that way.... the Stone Shape spell lists that it affects 10 cubic feet +1 cu ft/caster level, and the spell has no Saving Throw and no Spell Resistance. And in the PF Bestiary, it specifically says that stone golems are affected normally by spells that do not allow Saves and are not affected by Spell Resistance. I could have ruled that the spell seems to be outrageously overpowered vs. this particular monster, but as written, the player had a point and the rules seem to defend that point. So, is Stone Shape just an oversight by the designers of the stone golem, or does it really translate into a monster killer vs. animated stone creatures?

I've been hoping to find an updated version of the Feats provided so far for the Pathfinder RPG. The original 40 basic traits presented in Second Darkness adventure path seem to have been updated from D&D 3.5 to a PFRPG version in the free download .pdf that's available on this website, but the campaign specific traits and the Elves of Golarion traits have not been included in this document. I imagine that the Dwarf traits presented in Dwarves of Golarion are up to date, but that just means that they'll lopsided next to the Elves of Golarion traits. I'd also like to see campaign specific traits for Second Darkness and Legacy of Fire written up in PFRPG version, and if any have been added later, ones for Rise of the Runelords would be nice too.

Anyone seen these written up somewhere? An official version would be nice, but in the absence of that I'll settle for someone else's home-brewed conversions.

Wow, sounds great! I've got a Warlock PC in my current Rise of the Runelords campaign, and he's been griping at the lack of solid info on Pathfinder-izing his character, so now I will have room for his gripes based on solid facts! Looking forward to reading my PDF on this...

Hmmm... missing weapon and armor proficiencies for Artificers is kinda bothersome. Can we get an official ruling on this so we can fill in the blanks for those all those crazy Artificers? IIRC, in the Eberron core book way back when, they were proficient in all simple weapons and could use up to medium armor without penalty... does that theory hold water?

House rules... we all have a few. Not many actually play the game exactly as written in the book, without taking some liberties, some flexibility that you would prefer because it's easier, it's faster, or you just think your way is better... So, I thought it might be interesting to see what house rules you might happen to use at your table? Everyone share!

At my table, I house-rule an extra spell per spell level for every core caster. If it says you get 1 1st-level spell, you really get two. If the book says you know this many spells of 2nd-level per day, you get that many, plus 1. Orisons, cantrips, 1st-level, etc.... all get a bonus, both in spells known (for bards n' sorcerers) and in spells per day. This rule was originally started to encourage my players to play sorcerers now n' then. I'd introduced an NPC sorcerer who was actually a pretty kewl character, but although the party liked hanging with this guy, no one wanted to play one of their own due to limited spell choices. So I introduced this house rule, and that one extra spell known made all the difference. One more spell per spell level known to get something different, a utility spell or detection spell or travel spell. And it's still completely balanced b/c the bad guys get the same bonus... everyone gets the extra spells, not just PCs. Helps to round out some of the NPCs in pre-written adventures, too...

So, what are your house rules?

Need help on this from all you DMs out there, especially the game designers for Pathfinder RPG, if you're listening... my group has reached an impasse on the ruling of how the Ray of Enfeeblement spell works. More specifically, on whether multiple castings of Ray of Enfeeblement work on the same target.

For instance, a mid-level wizard is attacked by his companion, the party ranger who was so foolish as to go let herself fail a saving throw on a Domination spell (or whatever it is that vampires do). Instead of frying her on the spot with a lightning bolt for attacking him with sharp metal things, he decides make her too weak to use them... Round one, he hits her touch AC with a Ray of Enfeeblement, reducing her STR score by 8 points. Next round, he uses a Pearl of Power to cast the spell on her again, and one successful to-hit roll later, said ranger is still dominated, but has a whopping STR score of 2, too weak to stand up under the weight of her own equipment.

Now most of the other gamers in our group applaud this decision, since I could have just killed her outright with lightning or black tentacles or whatever... but one of the other players, now that he has his chance to DM, is saying that those don't stack, that the STR drain from Ray of Enfeeblement is a temporary effect that can't stack on multiple uses of itself. What do you say? How should multiple uses of Ray of Enfeeblement be applied?

a.) They stack, reducing target's STR by however much damage is rolled each time, to a minimum of 1.
b.) They don't stack, the first hit is the maximum you can be drained until the first one wears off.
c.) Multiple hits don't stack, but a better damage roll can replace a lower score from a previous hit.

Input, anyone?

Greetings all, the Curious Bard once again struts the stage...

This time I really need some suggestions, I mean REALLY need help here. I've been coerced by my wonderful band o' players into running another campaign and the Shackled City Adventure Path is what I've decided on. Now here's the kicker... since I've embraced PFRPG fully and want to convert everything into the new flavor that will be published in a more permanent form this coming summer, I will of course be using the Pathfinder Beta RPG in the meantime, which is not too tricky other than some feat, skill point, and class feature conversions that need to happen. What is giving me grief is the World Conversion... I was really hoping for help from the Pathfinder Chronicles: Campaign Setting but alas, despite the fact that we're all moving to Pathfinder and it's a Pathfinder supplement, the verdammt thing is completely set up for D&D 3.5 instead, so I'm a bit irritated by that, even downright irked. But I digress...

To insert Shackled City into Golarion, I'd like suggestions on where to put it, what location in Golarion would be appropriate, what gods need to be replaced with which, etc. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Seriously, folks, any input would be much appreciated...

Just a quick observation on the current Pathfinder Adventure Paths that are out. They are geared toward the D&D 3.5 but now we're all excited about the Pathfinder Beta instead. So how about a thread where we can ask about certain conversions to the Beta from the existing paths: Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, and now Second Darkness.

I for one would like to really know where Mssrs. Jacobs and Buhlman stand on the campaign feats presented in the campaign player's guides. How should these be adapted to fit the Pathfinder Beta, or should they just be shucked aside and eliminated completely? In the Runelords one, we have Big Game Hunter, City Born, Country Born, Lone Wolf, Totem Spirit, and Varisian Tattoo. In the Crimson Throne campaign, they added Sable Company Marine, Shingle Runner, Crossbow Mastery, Acadamae Graduate, and Harrowed. In the 2nd Darkness campaign, we add Cypher Script, Cypher Magic, and Additional Traits... plus the addition of new toys, the Traits themselves. How do these feats (and traits) translate to the Pathfinder RPG? In some cases, taken as written, there is a balance issue.

Just a quick observation on the current Pathfinder Adventure Paths that are out. They are geared toward the D&D 3.5 but now we're all excited about the Pathfinder Beta instead. So how about a thread where we can ask about certain conversions to the Beta from the existing paths: Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, and now Second Darkness.

I for one would like to really know where Mssrs. Jacobs and Buhlman stand on the campaign feats presented in the campaign player's guides. How should these be adapted to fit the Pathfinder Beta, or should they just be shucked aside and eliminated completely? In the Runelords one, we have Big Game Hunter, City Born, Country Born, Lone Wolf, Totem Spirit, and Varisian Tattoo. In the Crimson Throne campaign, they added Sable Company Marine, Shingle Runner, Crossbow Mastery, Acadamae Graduate, and Harrowed. In the 2nd Darkness campaign, we add Cypher Script, Cypher Magic, and Additional Traits... plus the addition of new toys, the Traits themselves. How do these feats (and traits) translate to the Pathfinder RPG? In some cases, taken as written, there is a balance issue.

The second session came two weeks later... the party again familiarized themselves with the town of Sandpoint and met the ranger Shalaela (yes, I know it's supposed to be Shalelu, but I liked this better). She tells what she knows about the local goblins, including their tribes and locations and the existence of some local goblin "heroes." That last bit surprised the party to no end, and they had all kinds of follow up questions about the heroes that I hadn't prepared answers for. Advice to fellow GMs: In case you didn't already know, your players will always do the last thing you expect. Come prepared! Other events in town included the gnome getting sick at the Hagfish by trying to drink from the tank, and Pomari, the Varisian Fighter, getting lured into her daddy's basement by a teenage Lolita, Shayliss Vinder. This last one was extremely funny... for me, of course. The player wasn't so thrilled and didn't really know what to do. He handled it like a champ of course, and a gentleman, gently rebuffing the daughter and scoring a nat 20 on a Diplomacy check to defuse a fuming father. Ven Vinder still doesn't like Pomari, of course, but at least he wasn't hauled before the guards on statutory charges.

The party wound up reading enough into Shalaela's reports that they decided to explore the marsh on the eastern side of the river, and spent a whole day looking for goblins in the swamp. When they didn't find any, they accused me of misleading them. Upon returning to Sandpoint though, they followed other clues and discovered the signs of the stolen corpse of the previous chapel priest. This led them into some Gather Information checks and learning a little about the late Father Tobyn and his presumed-dead daughter, Nualia. After Hemlock left for Magnimar to enlist more guards, the party used their new semi-deputized status to set up watch patrols and actually put into motion a new fire control system in town, with more buckets and rain barrels, and organizing fire marshals among the citizens of Sandpoint. Guess the torch-wielding goblins put a scare into them.

A few days later, they discover that their new friend Ameiko Kaijitsu, hostess of the Rusty Dragon and former adventurer, is missing. They explore her quarters, find the letter from Tsuto and by mid-morning are picking the locks on the Sandpoint Glassworks. I doubled the goblins upstairs, 16 in all, and the party lit into them. The extra goblins allowed me to use some comical or far-fetched tactics against the party, to further show their extremely chaotic natures. In battle, the goblins used tongs dripping with broken glass, threw panes of glass like improvised starknives, and wasted time trying to piece together broken dogslicers with molten glass as glue (it didn't work very well). One high point was when three goblins tried to grapple the large human, Pomari, to throw him into the glass furnaces but instead wound up hanging from him like twisting, snarling Christmas ornaments. Pomari has an 18 Strength, you see. It turned out that he didn't appreciate their motives and so managed to hurl two of the little fiends in the furnaces themselves... the last ran like bloody murder and wound up leading the party to the basement. There, they encountered Tsuto and were caught in a pincer movement between Tsuto and his 5 goblin bodyguards.

This fight was a little more brutal for the party, in part because of wounds already taken, in part because the wizard was out of spells, and also because Tsuto had a stunning fist attack and knew how to use it.

Maybe y'all can help me with something. My party went past the prison, freeing White-Eye and Cherrix ("White-Eye? Your name is White-Eye? Okay, White-Out, stay out of our way or Bruno gets to axe you!" [Bruno being the dwarf barbarian/battlerager]). Then they proceeded single-file down the stairs, leaving a skeleton crew upstairs to watch the prisoners. They get to the torture chamber and are appalled at the instruments of cruelty on display there. While they are fanning out and looking at stuff, Garekk rising from beneath the water on the far side of the room. Everyone saves vs. Despair except for the NPC rogue-swashbuckler type... which is fine, because she would always flee a fight with any undead anyway; even zombies creep her out!

Anyway, the mummy advances, they hit him, he hits them, yadda yadda yadda... when the dust settles, our ranger has failed his save vs. mummy rot, so now he's cursed. I read the MM entry on Mummies, and I'm not 100% clear on something. The incubation period is 1 minute, so he takes his 1d6 Con and Cha damage 1 minute after contact with the mummy. When does it start doing more damage... every minute, every day, what?

Also, on a side note, the bard searched through the dead mummy's wrappings with his bare hands. Any chance I would be justified in infecting him too, or is that just too cruel? Does a mummy have to actively strike someone to infect them with the Mummy Rot curse, or is touching the mummy enough to transmit the disease/curse?