Michael Moran 560's page

Are the spoilers mostly in the category of

1. Name drops some event you have no context on in thats due in 3 books time.

2. Extremely specific reminder text (In room b5 of dungeon 7 on page 453) that you can just forget

Because those kind of spoilers are fine I think? The only kind of spoilers that are an issue are spoilers where when they start playing again (after trying to find a natural end point to hand the DM chair over) they basically have to be in constant self doubt to "avoid metagaming" for the entire AP.

I was thinking of modifying events a bit to make the metaplot more explicit and just keep the party informed about it in character through some homebrew content. I'm running everything foxglove related in book 2 as my next GM period (someone else will run the "go to magnimar" bit) and I was considering giving them dreams of what those parts have told me about the runelord BBEG.

It doesn't seem like Karzoug being some sauron-esque presence the party is aware of would ruin things?

Thanks this was the necessary information to realise that I do basically just need to run book 2 myself (I'm the groups main GM and no one else felt comfortable comitting to a full module book of murder mystery content). Any spoilers in book 2 are now fine!

It turns out it was MY character that was the one foxglove took interest in for book 1. I'm thinking for getting my character out the way that we go with "envy" and the parties personal stake becomes that my character is now exiled and on the run after being accused of doing the murders since my character is

1. Pretending to be a pharasma priest
2. Is actually a necromancer

I guess the first thing that comes to mind would be just allocating each Part of a chapter to a different person to run. For example, Chapter Two is split (in the hardcover) into seven parts, so Bob could be assigned Parts 1 & 2, Jan could be assigned Parts 3 & 4, etc. It's not a perfect solution as some parts might be longer or shorter, and of course actual play doesn't always proceed in sequence, but it's the most natural division I can think of.

More specifically I wanted to know to what extent each part is self contained. Are there entire book mysteries where the person who ran part 1 will be spoiled on the rest of it? Some spoilers are fine I guess the trouble is if the spoiler is so big and game defining that everyones constantly trying to not metagame and second guess themself.

Hello all

I've been my groups perma DM for the last 5 years and I've been wanting to play in an AP pretty much since I started. No one in my group is really able to commit to full time DMing but we have reached a compromise where we "take turns" in the GM chair. We chose rise of the runelords as the campaign to run for this.

Something we're having trouble with is trying to split the book up into roughly self contained chunks so that it isn't too much of a chaotic mess (for burnt offerings we've just run one part each). Will we be able to maintain this later on or will it become impossible to segment the campaign in the same way?

If anyone had any tips / could offer necessary changes (without posting spoilers) to enable us to maintain this playstyle into the rest of the AP without it completly breaking down (some contrivance is fine we're an experienced group and can deal with it) then that would be greatly appreciated!

For more specific assistance it would be good to know what the best way to split skinsaw murders between 4 people might look like (Again no spoilers please).

I would ask people to avoid just saying "don't do this it will be clunky", we know, my players are doing this as a treat for me GMing for them so consistently with me not really having access to anyone other friends who play pathfinder 1e

PLOT TWIST:

I'm allowed to reroll one stat in this game, the second set of stats had not used it's reroll and I decided to reroll CON and got 15 giving the following stats

STR: 12
DEX: 16
CON: 15
INT: 10
WIS: 8
CHA: 14

I imagine this would give that second character far more options? Archer Bard perhaps?

Michael Moran 560 wrote:

This is the core rulebook (He let me have crossblooded and sage because they are pretty easy to understand and he doesn't have to own the book to make sure I'm not b##@*~~!ting), I can't have magus

I'll this much

I must be a half-elf
I must be chaotic Neutral
I cannot be a magus

Perhaps a fighter/Eldritch knight would work?

I don't even know why you're asking at this point. Seems like your path is set in stone. 90% of this thread's advise is useless if it's core only.

Since, you seem to have your heart set on Gish and a lack of reasonable options I suppose the original Dragon Disciple plan is good. I just wouldn't expect it to be a fantastic character.

I'm not set on the gish, it's purely that my party of 5 already has a fighter and a barbarian in it, I can't be a magus, I can't be a paladin, and I can't be a dwarf which is because the campaign is story based and the dm has told me i have to be a neutral elf/half-elf

I suppose I should also mention knowing my DM mostly does things like call of Cthulhu he generally tries to minimize combat in favor of dialogue and stuff in towns, so having powers I can use out of combat would be very useful too.

This is the core rulebook (He let me have crossblooded and sage because they are pretty easy to understand and he doesn't have to own the book to make sure I'm not bullshitting), I can't have magus

I'll this much

I must be a half-elf
I must be chaotic Neutral
I cannot be a magus

Perhaps a fighter/Eldritch knight would work?

Half-elf Eldritch knight wizard(or sage sort)/fighter?

My character has to be chaotic neutral for it to work due to other reasons so I can't be a paladin

Perhaps then I should just pick the second set of stats and be a bard with a rapier and a shortbow?

Is the second set of stats easier to work with than the first?

Hyper complex monstrosities are allowed

Is the Gish Dragon Disciple build not recommended then? I was thinking the way dragon disciple is built I could buff, debuff, blast and use a long spear to support other melee characters who are more tanky sorcerer/fighter/DD The Draconic/sage crossblooding is being allowed even though it breaks a few rules just because he thought it seemed cool.

I also have the option of playing as a character with these stats since there is a spare character sheet

STR: 12
DEX: 16
CON: 10
INT: 10
WIS: 8
CHA: 14

Would that be better?

My DM is quite the traditionalist and want's us to make characters where we roll each stat in order and we get what we're given, I rolled the following on the 3D6 classic system.

STR:18
DEX:10
CON:11
INT:15
WIS:11
CHA:9

High INT/STR but low CON seems like an awkward place to be, so what should I do with this character, my first instinct was a Gish of some, a crossblooded sage/draconic sorcerer so I can become a dragon disciple and cast with my int and maybe take a few fighter levels too. What do you people think? What should this character be?