James Jacobs wrote: That's the point. Ogres SHOULD be too ugly and horrible to look at. They're SUPPOSED to be that way. The sort of face only a necromancer ogre mama could love. Amirite? As to the main topic, I get the logic behind the new Hobber art but the result--to my eyes--is not that they're goblinoids but that they're aberrant and stretched out goblins. I don't see "hobgoblin" at all. This is honestly Paizo's fault (in part at least) for having already made distinguishing hobgoblin and bugbear art in Ironfang that conveys their respective racial traits/cultures better than the new stuff. Captain Morgan wrote: I just wanted to say the Hellknight Hill bugbear design is TERRIFYING. It feels like a boogeyman out of a nightmare, which seems pretty fitting for Pathfinder serial killer bugbears. Couldn't disagree more. It's not even the slightest bit terrifying! If that's a bugbear, it must've been the litter's runt! It's basically a furry, skimpy goblin doing its best to look menacing and only manages to look mostly cute and silly instead. From the art, it's hard to tell that it's supposed to be medium-sized (or even an actual bugbear). Bregga Dreamstalker is a more terrifying example. Literally nightmarish! The imposing tear-your-limbs-off menace of Scarvinious is also far more alarming than the runty joke of Yoletcha. Also, for so many reasons, this (also from Ironfang) says "Hobgoblin soldier" better than the new hob-soldier art, which as I've said elsewhere, looks more like a hobgoblin got his head stuffed inside his armor and had a goblin shoved down to fill the space instead. Again, I get the logic but the end result still manages to come across as bizarre and unfitting to the race. Disclaimer: All IMHO, 2019.
Tender Tendrils wrote: To be honest, I don't see why people are so bothered by the idea of playing as a heroic member of a culture that is traditionally considered "evil". They're not. They're bothered that the tradition of goblins being evil maniacs is over. And further, because that's true, there is no tension involved with playing a "heroic" goblin and they are not more heroic because of it.
Quote: Uncommon is what we use to indicate that a particular ancestry is not necessarily found (or appropriate as PCs) in all areas of the Inner Sea region. Shame this approach wasn't used for goblins as they meet the same criteria for inclusion/exclusion to campaigns as hobgoblins or other typically hostile or deviant races. At least it would've put control back into GMs' hands which otherwise seems to be the rule Paizo aimed at in these new 2E scenarios. Fantastic idea though, uncommon ancestries, even if a missed opportunity to smooth dissent and table-issues about goblins. Also, the football headed art makes these hobs seem creepily and less distinctly hobgoblin, almost as though a goblin is standing on an actual hobgoblin's head stuffed inside the armor. Weird. I wonder when we'll see more, and if it'll start to feel more convincing as a "Pathfinder Hobgoblin," which they'd already done a good job making distinct from other systems before now. Maybe a case of trying a bit too hard to be unique for 2E? Not sure what to think on that one.
Edge93 wrote: By the rules you quoted, Hardness isn't Resistance to all damage. It's Hardness. Which reduces the damage an object takes any time it takes damage. No reference to the Resistance rules. (similarly, effects that ignore or reduce resistance don't apply, it seems) Sure, but does it reduce damage in the same way that resistance to all damage does (i.e., to each type separately)? It seems an awful lot like Hardness is just a type of "resistance to all" and might reasonably be treated the same for determining how damage is reduced. It should be noted that shield block's trigger requires a "physical attack" but that would seem satisfied by a wolf doing slash and acid damage with its bite. Would you argue that hardness should only apply to the slash damage, in that case?
"Functions as one monster" is with respect to how the swarm itself functions, not how others function on it. That is to say, its actions in the game are treated as if a single monster, not as 100s of separate entities. If you attempt a grapple against a swarm, you'll grab one of the constituent creatures and not the swarm itself.
Actually, I expect the person with Count Lowl's portrait to enumerate the divergent fluctuations expressed by each tradition as demonstrated by the ephemeral metaphysics of dynamic magical essences to the rest of us. But seriously, the central thematic difference is that arcane magic relies on intense research and intellectual effort to create its formulaic magical effects, while occult magic uses unusual methods to tap into poorly understood spiritual and soul/psychic phenomena, thereby mucking with topics that divine casters otherwise tend to stake a claim. The result is that arcane magic manipulates matter and energy in ways that occult magic never can, such as through a Grease or Wall of Fire spell. Occult magic manipulates spirits and souls the way arcane casters never can, such as by the Bind Soul, Possession or Wail of the Banshee spells. Crossover appears where powerful mental and illusory magic is involved, such as various prismatic spells and things like Crushing Despair, Dominate and Nightmare.
It's my understanding that this might be the first in a series of connected "intro" modules akin to PF1E's "Price of Immortality" trilogy. If so, this is the "Crypt" module and characters finishing it may have a future still. That or I'm completely wrong/mis-remembering something I heard or read about Plaguestone.
Doktor Weasel wrote: So it starts in Isger, goblin emissaries come asking for help. Some of their people who had been staying at the abandoned Hellknight Keep have stopped responding. Uggggggh. They start with a ham-fisted "goblin emissaries" hook? I didn't have much of an opinion on this AP so far but this doesn't improve it. Why the heck would a party of do-good heroes care about a group of missing goblins at an abandoned Hellknight Keep? Ugggggh, why Paizo, why?! Please tell me I'm missing something with this.
For players about to read this, note that SPOILERS lay ahead. YogoZuno wrote: If you read ahead, the overall finale also encourages the use of the original characters. Although it is not at all mandatory, I expect the player coolness would be reduced if they had replaced characters along the way. I agree that at least one of the PCs should be among the original. I'd even argue that if none of the original group survive along the way, that the AP should probably be considered over with the last one's death anyhow. They aren't *all* necessary, but at least one surviving seems intrinsic given how things are driven from chapter 4 onward. That said, with a little extra work and narrative it's entirely possible to maintain the story's horror and impact without the original PCs. There may even be an added element of terror for new characters encountering chapter 3's finale as the originals come back to have a word or two with them. I'll even throw a twist on it -- imagine if the DM allowed PCs who defeated their earlier counterparts to act as a "host body" for the defeated dreamland's PC "spirit," thereby reviving that original PC going forward (but losing some or all of the "host" PC as well). Later on, throw in a madness that occasionally suppresses one personality or another for even more RP fun. There's all sorts of delightful things that can be done to keep things moving along. Tasfarel wrote: I did not want to imply that these encounters are too difficult and you should leave them out. I just wanted to point out that a GM should be prepared to intervene if players are too bold or to careless in their approach. In this AP, if you're having to intervene as the DM you've potentially failed your duty to the PCs who are carelessly approaching a damning situation. Foreshadowing is SOOO necessary to create dread and horror (in both PCs and players alike) but also to give players a chance to help their PCs survive encounters that are likely to kill them. And then the situations should play out as they are, at full danger and lethality. It's so rewarding for players when they overcome what seemed like certain doom. For my players, as one example, I'd dropped subtle hints of the revenant as early as mid-Chapter 1, so around 6 sessions worth of growing buildup and foreshadowing. Before the full melee with the monster, I also initiated a brief encounter that by now filled them with terrible alarm--the players completely understood how dangerous it was and how likely its targets were to die when it would finally catch up to them. The resulting tension was fantastic. After they defeated it in a harrowing battle and without any deaths, the sense of relief and accomplishment was exhilarating for them all. I'd wager that this encounter ranks in the top 3 for them throughout the AP and would have been critically deflated if I'd intervened to save them or blunt the result in some way. Tasfarel wrote: But after all it comes down to the playstyle your group´s preferring. While this is true, it also comes down to choosing the right AP and adventures that match a particular group's playstyle. Not all groups will fit all adventures, and Strange Aeons is less suitable for many because of its themes, nature and native difficulty. My group is also very (very) focused on the plot but we all see the challenges as inseparable from it. The beating heart behind this plot is the overwhelming danger and continued desperation against alien forces as experienced by the PCs. Dulling any of that dulls the plot, as we see it. And in case it isn't clear, all of this is just my opinion and outlook on the AP. It's entirely fine and welcome for others to view and play it different. There's more than one way to skin a yellow-robed cat.
reflactions wrote:
While that really is a great catch, the issue is that psychic spells still give off manifestations which alert others. It's called out in this FAQ as a means to prevent "spellcasters that use spell-like abilities, psychic magic, and the like from running completely amok against non-spellcasters in a non-combat situation." They do mention future abilities (such as Cunning Caster) that might help someone get away with this sort of thing, but they also suggest that even with boons to conceal the casting, a check is always possible. Regardless, I can't verify at the moment but I don't think Daelene has anything to aid her in this way against PCs at Iris Hill.
Tasfarel wrote: Risi is a pain in the ass, as it is the revenant. Both encounters can easily kill of one character. The lack of resurrection spells in that town make this even worth. I'm not sure why you would characterize Risi and the revenant this way in view of the campaign itself. For that matter, there are challenges even later into the AP that PCs *definitely* won't survive if they make the wrong choice or even have lingering bouts of indecision. These are exceptional threats, yes, but they're designed to be. It's a Lovecraftian-styled AP, after all. As such, hero deaths to things that can't be recovered from fits comfortably into the theme. This ain't your Rise of the Runelords. Somehow, my players escaped harrowing doom with both Risi and the revenant, but only because doses of luck and quick thinking came together to make it possible. Each case brought someone within a hair's breadth of the grave. It's SO memorable because of that, however. After the survival-horror that was Chapter 1, and the sort of surprise-doom being thrown at them in Chapter 2, they realize they are never safe in this AP and death awaits around every foggy corner. That said, anyone intending to run this AP should warn players that it is a more challenging path that will probably result in the deaths of at least some PCs along the way. If the group doesn't like that, they probably don't really enjoy the Lovecraftian themes of overwhelming struggle and terror either, and it isn't the best AP to play anyhow. It loses a lot of its impact and the sense of reward if its dangers are toned down. This is all my humble opinion, of course.
Dracovar wrote:
This happens with every major edition. It always looks like a dumpster fire. There's always some edition war mongering. There is nothing new or extraordinary about this.
For all of the Lovecraftian lore/critters, I've been increasing the DC by +10. I'll ease the DC by 5 during Chapter 3, once they've studied Lowls's books and venture into the dreamy beyond on the Sellen. Alongside I've encouraged them to do research and investigation in order to uncover the things they're up against. That said, I handled the painting in the Old Grotto a bit different. I allowed them all a check (with the increased DC applied), but regardless of their result, upon seeing it I had all PCs experience a probing sensation in their mind that repeated the words, "Xhamen-Dor. Xhamen-Dor. Xhamen-Dor." I explained that they instantly knew that it was the name of the creature depicted even though they couldn't understand how. None made a knowledge check high enough to know anything further, but they did have to make sanity checks. They were positively horrified at this event, and very wary of the painting and chamber thereafter. Since then, I've been including flashes of this awareness in their dreams, but I'm also going to have them experience moments where their mind has strange and compelling thoughts about Xhamen-Dor, including receiving fragments of information they couldn't have possibly known from elsewhere. This is, of course, meant to demonstrate how their minds have become infected by the mere knowing of this other-worldly monstrosity. I'll let this "infection" build in intensity until they deal with Neruzavin.
For my part, I decided that Debis could see in the darkness and added an additional effect: the darkness spreads as if it were some sort of inky, entwining substance that fills the area beyond the initial chamber. This allowed Debis to threaten the space beyond and created a pressure to the situation that forced the players to make quick decisions. As might be expected, this slow spreading terrified most of the group, especially since they hadn't resolved the "hemorrhagic road" and they knew exactly what happened if someone tried to cross it. One of the PCs entered the darkness hoping to do battle or learn more and soon discovered that she got more than she bargained for with Debis. As things went poorly, the prospect of battling some unknown specterfrom within the darkness rattled all of them, and they sprinted around the growing cloud seeking the relative safety of the southern hall. This retreat soon led them back to the asylum's central section and Administrator Losandro's office. In her office I added the two chess knights (rather than having them in the brothers' former room) along with notes of a junior doctor that detailed the pair's history, their medical journey, as well as the shadow lamp gift. Having let the players see Brenton playing with the lamp much earlier made this discovery profound for them. After finishing their exploration of the central segment (and realizing the danger of the blood-dripped door), they returned to trade with Brenton. When they return in an upcoming session, the doors to Debis's chamber will be closed again and the dayroom will be much as they encountered it before discovering Debis, though I've got a little more of a surprise waiting for them when they do. Nonetheless, using Debis's Nightmare room as a gate feels like an ideal approach, even if it has to be played up beyond the initial limits in order to nudge PCs back to other areas. It should be dangerous and terrifying but also demonstrates that these otherwise horrible situations can be resolved with investigation and research rather than brute force in the more typical adventure fashion. I'm looking forward to watching them deal with the northern sections!
We've been told that PF2 will include a downtime system as part of the core rules, but we've heard next to nothing about how it would function, how crafting and character wealth has been re-balanced inside the new rules, or how the basic economies of settlements and adventuring will operate mechanically in 2E. Is no one else curious about this sort of stuff? It seems like no one is pondering on any of it.
YogoZuno wrote: If I recall, there are a couple of Lesser Restoration items available in the Chapel, if searched. Also, I hope someone trained the Heal skill... As parties are prone to having psychic casters in this AP, it's worth reminding about the occult skill unlocks. Faith healing (heal) can suppress ability damage and afflictions, even potentially removing something with a really strong check. Read Aura can learn if someone is poisoned or diseased. It won't tell more than that, but it's at least a start for some groups.
YogoZuno wrote: The Bloodwind intro isn't really tied to Illmarsh, that's just the location selected for it. You could easily move the Bloodwind encounter elsewhere, and add something Deep One focused at Illmarsh. But having the Deep One attack happen a little later, after a little separation from Thrushmoor, might work better narratively. That's true, though I like the tension created by the Illmarsh Watchers as they raise the barbed chain to block the ships' from passing into the wharf. If it's just the Sellen Starling, the watchers are clearly intending to block the PC's ship. If it's also the ominous Bloodwind, there are at least questions raised in the minds of players. None of that may be relevant if its a deep one attack there.
YogoZuno wrote: You could potentially replace that, or alter it, or add other Deep One encounters while travelling across the Lake. Oh yeah, definitely. I don't think I'd alter the Illmarsh encounter as it's the introduction to the Bloodwind, but I do like the idea of an attack within the first day or so of leaving the Thrushmoor docks. Especially if Lysie or Melisenn still somehow lives.
Revan wrote: I'd say make them dedicated to Shub-Niggurath. ... Perhaps state up Lysie Brit, the witch who runs the fishery and is stated to be skum-blooded, as a Deep One Hybrid, and either have her replace the Skum Sorcerer in the Fort or at Melissen's side under Iris Hill. This is a great suggestion and the direction I'm now leaning. In return for capturing and holding Fort Hailcourse, Melissen has promised to overlook (and even help arrange) the Deep Ones' infiltration of Thrushmoor thereafter. It's essentially the same promise as given to the Skum, who would've simply slaughtered the populace, but the Deep Ones could prove more enduring and valuable allies beyond. I think it could all work and, of course, there's now the threat of Deep One corruption for both NPC and PC alike! MUHAHAHAHA! Sorry, the chaos overcame me a bit there.
Has anyone substituted Deep Ones for the Skum in Thrushmoor? As they are fanatically religious, which Great Old One would it be appropriate for them to be devoted to in this adventure? It would also seem that their goals would be quite different than those used to motivate the Skum, being that they may prefer to infiltrate and use the populace rather than simply slaughter them. What's a reasonable approach to their inclusion and motivation, especially since they may be aware (or at least suspicious) of Melisenn's possibly conflicting allegiances?
What is the Red Destiny (and it's cardinal handle) a reference to? Whose blade was it before it ended up in Losandro's secret alcove? Is there an out-of-game reference here as well? The closest out-game reference I can conjure up is August Derleth's "The Adventure of the Black Cardinal," which seems tangentially related as the story is part of his Sherlockian series of tales and PCs discover the Red Destiny at the same time as they receive a reference to the Sleepless Detective Agency in game. That made me suspect it may have somehow been Cesadia's sword, but I haven't encountered anything to suggest more. Am I missing something with the unusually early appearance of this +2 shortsword?
Daniel Scholler wrote: Quinn, the one-time possessor of the Necronomicon, has uploaded his stat block following module 5 to the Dropbox for your perusal--if you dare! Will there be a stat block for Quinn (or the others) showing his final state at the end of the campaign, presumably 17th? Also, how do you feel about your decision to go two-weapon fighting with him? Would you make the same choice if you had to repeat the experience? In the SA Experiment document, it sounds as though you may have struggled with it even after you got Studied Combat going, at least until Dreams of the Yellow King. (Sorry for reviving this otherwise dormant thread. It seemed the most appropriate place to ask!)
Zaister wrote: Do we really need threads like this? I don't think this is either funny or in any way productive, and it wasn't even posted on April 1. Absolutely. Caricatures drawn by this form of mockery are effective forms of criticism. It's productive at making the intended point with a note of humor alongside. Why shouldn't we want/need them?
bookrat wrote: Ok, let's change the subject. I notice that the goalposts have been shifted from "playing clones" to "playing a 'last of' concept." So let's shift right along with them. There's no staple "last of/only one of" approach with goblins in the Drizzt Do'Urden fashion, but they will come with the repeated, groaning cringe of players who watch the branding of Paizo's 1E goblins evaporate as the new edition officiates them into an all too routine and bothersome model that no one really asked for.
graystone wrote:
Bingo! Malachandra wrote: Because the OP seemed pretty anti Drizzt characters. I am for the precise reason that Graystone outlined. I like Drizzt the character but hate what his clones did to drow at the tabletop. Malachandra wrote: This will definitely change the dynamic of what it means to play a goblin character. Therein lies the issue.
Malachandra wrote: So since a unique concept has been done once, no one can ever play that character again? I can "emulate the adored qualities" of Drizzt but not emulate the character himself? How close can I get before I'm now offending people with my playstyle? And why can't I create an exact match of Drizzt? What if I wanted to steal his backstory, word for word, and recreate his... You can do anything you'd like. I encourage you to emulate or copy anything you want. In. Your. Games. That doesn't mean the rest of us must condone it as a staple/core element in a new edition, in official materials and settings, or in organized play. All that said, is there something wrong with wanting goblins to be the evil goblins they've always been until now? Why are you so offended that people adore what made Paizo's goblins a brand in the first place and want to reject a move away from that?
Malachandra wrote: I don't understand the Drizzt hate. What's wrong with emulating a popular character? Because the thing about the character is that he's a uniquely good example from an otherwise thoroughly evil race. The whole point is that there aren't any other benevolent drow running around rebelling against their murderous relatives and whatever other evil they encounter. It's a significant feature that makes the character so compelling. And it's the unique aspect that sees emulating players basically defecate on the appeal of it all, which if nothing else, tramples immersion and setting fidelity for other players. Especially when, at the time, there seemed to be one of these angsty dual-wielding drow pulling up a seat at every table. It got a little crazy. And finally, it's one thing to emulate the adored qualities of a popular character and another thing to emulate the character. No one like a Legolas clone even though he doesn't suffer the unique qualities that Drizzt did, though an astute and talented elven archer would hardly raise an eyebrow when played without the context of the popular character by someone else. While goblins in PF2 won't be emulating a specific character, per se, it's the fact that the lore about goblins--the thing that made them so attractive in the first place--is demoted in favor of mass appeal. No one would have a problem with more goblin content if it continued with the strain of "dog-hating, horse chopping, fire throwing maniacs." That's actually what people want, isn't it? I mean, did anyone ask for goblin paladin crusaders for core? That was on the bucket list?
Charlie Brooks wrote: I think it would be good for the community if we tried to stay open-minded and encouraged people to play what they want rather than immediately draw comparisons to Drizzt or Pokemon or whatever other fad people have decided is the wrong kind of fun. There's a reason people bring up those fads. Beyond that, it's one thing for the community to be open-minded and encourage people to play what they want, and another thing to make all those "open-minded" options core features. They're really not the same thing.
PF2's goblins are the newest incarnation of Drizzt Do'Urdens at the table. You know what I'm talking about here. It's not so much that goblins-as-core may give license to gray-area players, which is a minor but real consideration. It's that Paizo is ruining the lore and core appeal that made Pathfinder goblins attractive to players in the first place. And just like stupid drow, they did it to tap into some "mass marketing" appeal of them as a playable race. Seems like a bad idea that Paizo, for some reason, positively adores.
Charlie Brooks wrote: I think the "mode" style of play can help this area. If most encounters are separated by scenes in exploration mode, you can have players make skill checks for what their PCs are doing while exploring. The results of those skill checks can then become initiative rolls when combat begins. I love how simple solutions can be the most clever. This is a great way to instantly slip the group into combat. Instead of asking for initiative, it's a fantastic way to drop a surprise raid on the PCs by throwing that first attack roll instead of initiative. I wouldn't use it all the time, but I love the idea of keeping players on their toes with this as an occasional slip into combat.
Two Headed Snake wrote:
I realize this is a stalled response to your question, but maybe someone (even you Two Headed Snake!) will find some value in it. When I ran this, I modified the setup so that the army surrounded the citadel with 3 battalions of units consisting of a mixture of sergeant, devil slayer, field hospital and siege troops. (Roughly 20 or so in total.) I explained that this was an abstraction that represented many thousands of men. Above the troops, I added a small number of legion archons flying overhead as scouts, roughly 2 per battalion. These were primarily acting as a challenge to villains' attempt at dropping the tathlum without raising attention, and the archons took no part in the battle that would follow. I then explained the criteria surrounding the use of the tathlum, though I left the exact effects something of a mystery. They had a rough idea of the area that would be devastated and I modified this as well from what was described in the module to account for the more broadly arranged army. They also knew that they had to drop it from height, that they had to do so discreetly, and that delivering it to the desired spot required an 1d20 + BAB + INT mod attack roll, with a 200 ft. range modifier. Essentially, I forced them to decide which portions of the army they wanted to most impact with the tathlum, making them choose between things like harming the greatest number of units vs. damaging fewer but more elite troops or siege weapons, and so on. This was accomplished by positioning the troops around the battlefield in a way so as to make these choices naturally apparent. After dropping the tathlum, troops within the center portion of the blast had a very high FORT save to make or die. Survivors would take massive damage and be stunned and then staggered. Troops within the outer ring of the blast also had to make a fort save versus significant damage and would be staggered for 3 rounds (reduced to 1 if they made the save). After that, I allowed players to choose to play either a Horned Devil or Nightwalker which spawned from the blast. I made these act like summons with a 1 hour duration, and if the player could cause the death of another troop or devil/nightwalker player within the blast radius of the tathlum, a second devil or nightwalker would spawn under their control. I then turned them loose to battle one another, the troops and the citadel for 7 rounds. I explained that each round represented between 1 to 2 minutes in duration and modified move speed and a few rules for combat to make it play more smoothly. They weren't aware beforehand that it would be limited to that duration, which was partly to control how much real-world time we'd play the battle, but also because I didn't want them to determine the full results of the conflict that way. Simultaneously, their PCs attacked Endranni's post on the command hill to the east, and we ran that battle immediately following the larger conflict. It all turned into an exciting and epic evening of conflict for the players.
Start with a normal neutral-evil human character. He gains the half-fiend template and is now a NE outsider (native). Later, he is transformed into an undead with the augmented subtype such as a vampire or mummy, presumably leading to a type of undead (augmented outsider, native). How does the Holy Smite spell affect this character? Does he take 10d6 from it as an evil outsider? Or 5d8 as an evil character irrespective of anything else? How does a Bane (outsiders (native)) weapon affect him? Or a ranger with favored enemy of the same flavor?
I created a reference sheet for despair that some of you may find useful. The first part denotes what events or other consequences happen as the despair reaches a threshold. The second part lists the despair gained and the cause for the gain. 0
15
30
40
55
DESPAIR | CAUSE
bitter lily wrote: Midnight Anarch, I feel for you, since this is apparently not a theoretical discussion but a "how do I keep my player from taking over my game" discussion. What did you think of my Int mod of -5 proposal? I've kicked your idea around as a possibility but settled on the compromise that they understand some base information with this weird non-intelligence intelligence. I may yet impose a penalty if things become too unbelievable or overpowered. I also introduced the idea of using Profession(Undead X) to direct them in ways outside the limits of the base commands. Details of how these function in game remain an abstraction, but the concept is that some individuals can become quite talented in getting the mindless undead to do what they want.
Mysterious Stranger wrote: Is there any reason a necromancer cannot give orders to his undead to obey another? In the Black Markets supplement, where undead slaves are described, it provides the following: "A standard human zombie costs about 90 gp, while a skeleton costs 45 gp, although most necromancers charge an additional fee of 50 to 100 gp to provide a body, and purchasers are expected to provide their own means of controlling their shambling laborers. " That suggests that "giving control" to another as a verbal order is dangerously unreliable if not untenable. Mysterious Stranger wrote: If you use the 4 HD per level limitation Geb would have a hard time functioning. This would mean that each necromancer has to personally supervise all his undead. That would mean the necromancer is out in the field or the factory instead of studying magic. This is not how I picture Geb being run. I picture Geb being kind of like the south before the civil war except instead of living slaves they use undead. Since many of the “Masters” are undead that cannot stand sunlight that means they have to have some way of delegating orders or their minions cannot work during the day. Considering one of the principle exports of Geb is supposed to be agriculture this is a problem. I think it more likely that there are numerous intelligent undead serving as taskmasters, most being skeletal champions or zombie lords, working to drive packs of 5 to 15 mindless undead and interceding to complete tasks that the mindless wouldn't be expected capable of doing well, or at all. These intelligent undead probably have magical devices that grant control over their pack, and an overseer (living or dead) directs the numerous packs through these taskmasters. My necromancer and I argued a bit about what sort of tasks a zombie could accomplish -- for example, can they plant seeds without oversight? I suggested that the intelligent taskmasters might step in to do the work, relegating the mindless as muscle for jobs they could do reliably, such as pulling ploughs and harrows, pushing mill wheels, and so on. She rebelled at the idea that there could or would be so many champions or lords in the fields and thinks the mindless are capable of handling tasks an untrained laborer could be put to use doing. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much material regarding how the farms in Geb work or are staffed, and my necromancer scoffs when I don't accept her arguments of greater autonomy in the mindless by pointing out that we just don't know what is envisioned for the farming there. That said, I do function on a mindset of mindless undead being, well, actually mindless, whereas she sees them as having a degree of mental understanding based on the contrasting definition for mindless found in Pathfinder. Needless to say, she's not interested in farming but in giving more sophisticated tactical orders to her minions. I am going to bend here, but with the compromise that commanding or tasking mindless undead requires a related Profession (undead x) skill to manage them with efficiency beyond the most basic orders described in the related spells. So, should she decide to take up farming, she'll need Profession (undead farmer) to get the most out of her undead slaves.
Mysterious Stranger wrote: Skeletons and Zombies are mindless so are not much use for work. Zombies can follow orders so they will work as field slaves as long as they have an overseer. Skeletal Champions and Zombie Lords would work for overseers and house slaves as well as anything that requires skills. My argument falls along that lines as well (though for both skeletons and zombies), but she believes that position demands an unreasonable number of intelligent undead as overseers, so far as Geb's example is concerned. William Werminster wrote: The Unseen Servant has a bit of information about what a mindless commanded creature can do. Honestly I think that she is somewhat right and should be allowed... Unseen servant is a magical force rather than a creature, which is why it's noted as mindless so caster's don't get any bright ideas as to its capability. Its entire purpose is to do tasks of the sort we're considering but it has no cunning, no persistence and no separation from the caster -- it's her magic incarnate, cleaning the pots and pans. So far as it goes, Unseen Servant's effect is closer to the result of the Skeleton Crew spell than the zombies and skeletons of Animate Dead. And Skeleton Crew is a peculiar example that seems to break the normal rule for mindless undead out of fluff reasons. All the same, I intend to relax my stance somewhat, but I have to laugh that she thinks it preposterous to play a necromancer the way the rules were written before Pathfinder! Zombies that can't make INT checks! That's C-R-A-Z-Y!. And for the record, here is the 3.5 description for mindless creatures: "Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks."
Daw wrote: How many spells are there that could give our sample non-intelligent undead effective skill levels or bonuses? We know the can't have ranks of their own, so how does the clever Necromancer get around it? Maybe this will add something to the discussion. There's at least one: Skeleton Crew. Daw wrote: Honestly, I think the whole idea of a non intelligent entity being an effective active anything is a bit ridiculous. I have to agree. I think the Animate Dead and Command Undead spells outline the typical limits for what a necromancer can get out of them, while wild, uncontrolled ones are entirely rabid. And that's the extent of it. Mysterious Stranger wrote:
That's a good question. My resident necromancer argues that they can and do have a broader range of actions than described in the creature and related spell descriptions, pointing to large-scale farming by undead in Geb, as well as the undead "house slaves" commonly found in the nobles' manors. She argues that these examples demonstrate that mindless undead must be capable of more than the basic commands listed or it would be neither possible nor desirable for those situations to arise--not if the mindless need unending micromanagement to succeed. The fact that they can make INT-based checks is part of the foundation for her claims.
Plausible Pseudonym wrote: I think a knowledge skill check is pointless for a mindless creature. It can make the check technically, but it can't actually know the answer, because it has no consciousness or ability to know anything. How about as relates to commands? "Attack the Kintargo Opera House!" (Local DC 10) "Guard against anyone unless they wear Zon-Kuthon's symbol!" (Religion DC 10) "Kill Baron Lessmind and those with his crest!" (Nobility DC 10) "Attack all Shoanti who enter the cave!" (Geography DC 10)
Poison Dusk wrote: Just keep in mind you can't use knowledge untrained if the DC is higher than 10. What is the DC to know what city you are in? What about knowing where the Opera House is? "Know local laws, rulers, and popular locations" is listed as a DC 10 Local check. Presumably that would be enough to recognize a fixture as popular as the Kintargo opera house. I have to imagine it's a low Geography DC -- maybe even just a DC 5 -- to know what city you are in at the moment. Even if we consider it a DC 10, that means all mindless undead would know but some ignorant humans wouldn't. "Know location of nearest community" is a DC 20, by contrast, so neither the commoner nor the skeleton would know where Vyre or Nisroch is actually located but it's probably just a DC 10 or so just to know they exist at all. Skeleton still wins.
|