Moriartty's page

Moriartty wrote:

Player, or DM if neccesary, looking to start a Pathfinder group in the Chicago northwest suburbs.

I am interested in a game that meets once a week or once every two weeks on the weekends. Weeknights are possible but game could not start before 7pm.

Drop a note if interested or know a group.

I'm right next door to you, Moriartty. Algonquin. I might be able to attend a weekend thing if they were on Sundays, as I usually end up working every Saturday but one a month.

Drop me an email at timothy hanna @ gmail . com.

I am seeing how many in total I can gather together.

Moriartty wrote:

Player, or DM if neccesary, looking to start a Pathfinder group in the Chicago northwest suburbs.

I am interested in a game that meets once a week or once every two weeks on the weekends. Weeknights are possible but game could not start before 7pm.

Drop a note if interested or know a group.

I am moving away from my group in the NW suburbs they need players.

Are you giving up on gaming? Where does this group meet at and what are they playing?

Moriartty wrote:

Zaskar24 wrote:

Where in the NW suburbs? I used to drive to Arlington Heights once a week from the South suburbs for a game and I am looking for one again.

Far NW Burbs, Crystal Lake region.

Just a little to far for me to travel. Thank you for the reply though.

Still looking for members.

Depending on where everyone lives we may meet at Games Plus in Mount Prospect. They always have tables there and would be a central location. At the very least the first couple games would be there. Would want to know everyone before the game moved to my house if it ever did.

So if Mount Prospect Games Plus is within your acceptable range let me know.

I assume the barbarian/wizard in question is using a wand or two to allow him to pull this routine more than once a day. Let him keep it up. Make him use a proper sized weapon then let him have at it. He is fairly one dimensional and I dont see him as overpowered.

He cannot do anything versus ranged foes and his power really drops if someone targets him with a dispel. Also as mentioned he can really only pull off this routine when the party gets prep time. Otherwise he has to sit out of combat for several rounds buffing and possibly letting his party get killed around him.

I'm not so sure that ever worked. Even if the creature with reach attacks, and you ready an action to attack them when they attack you, by game rules, the creature never actually moves out of its square, so even when the held action is triggered, the character's base isn't in reach.

The monster effectively moved itself within range when it swiped at the player. So it would make complete sense that you can attack at the same time. Like I said though it would only work when reach attack is done with natural weapons.

You can't replay that scene literally anyway unless the monster is written up like the hydra and allows its limbs to be sundered, because normally you can't cut away a creature's limbs.

But you are able to attack the limbs and do damage and I was figuring based on the scene that the limbs acted like Hydra necks.

Ravingdork wrote:

Couldn't you already prepare an action to strike a creature's limbs as it attacked you (even though it might have reach)?

This feat seems to allow you to do something you already could do (or should be able to do).

While you can ready an action to attack a foe that attacks you, you still need to have reach to that foe to attack them. You can't prepare an action to strike an attacking creature's limbs because that more or less negates the whole point of a creature having reach in the first place.

This feat lets you do just that, but it has a hefty prerequisite.

So to make reach a powerful ability we have to run with the strange logic that limbs are immune to harm? I guess I can never replay that scene from LOTR where the party fighters chop of some of the tentacles of the beast since of course none of them were within range of the creatures body.

To me anyone should be able to do this. But its holding an action for a single strike and thus hurts anyone with more than one attack per round. Also it can only happen against foes using natural weapons. The Ogre with reach using a giant club is immune unless your plan is to sunder his weapons, whether or not you have the above feat.

Moriartty wrote:

The biggest problem with DM Fiat is often that the DMs who talk about it the most are the least fair DM. They fudge roles, railroad to keep things how they want, or make rulings that always fall their way.

I understand that the DM knows more about a campaign than the players. That does NOT mean that he knows more about the rules. If its specific situation in the middle of combat I can understand that a DM needs to make a quick stark ruling so things do not bog down too much, combat moves slow enough already.

But out of combat is another matter. Recent example is a player asking a question based on a magic item she wanted to purchase. The DM interpreted the rules one way, the entire party interpreted a different way. The DM played the old "I am the LAW" routine because its "his game" and flat out stated all rules no matter what were his to decide.

That really offended me and quite honestly pissed me off. Yes a DM knows the campaign and thus speaks from greater knowledge on some things. But basic interpretation of the rules out of combat is not one of those situations.

Who are you to tell them GM what magic item you are buying or how it works? If he doesn't want something in his game then too bad. You don't get to pick magic items. That is crazy.

"Oh gee, let me just hit the store and buy a wand of lightning. Sure the kingdom is in peril but the king will just let me walk into town and purchase something that could wipe out his honor guard."

"Man, that wizard is pretty sneaky with his invisibility. Better get some glasses of see the invisible. Sure the town is getting hit hard but the constable never thought to pick up a pair."

I happen to be playing DnD 3.5 or Pathfinder where there are very clear rules for the purchase of magic items. Those rules tell me how likely a town of a given size will have the item I want. Those rules also very clearly tell me how I can use my Item Creation feats to create said magic item if it turns out that the item is not available in the town I am in.

What game are you playing? By the way take your tone and shove it.

Also try reading the post. This has nothing to do with what item was being purchased the post was in regard to interpreting how the item fuctioned. The DM had no problem with getting the magic item. He just had a very poor and inaccurate interpretation of the items use.

The biggest problem with DM Fiat is often that the DMs who talk about it the most are the least fair DM. They fudge roles, railroad to keep things how they want, or make rulings that always fall their way.

I understand that the DM knows more about a campaign than the players. That does NOT mean that he knows more about the rules. If its specific situation in the middle of combat I can understand that a DM needs to make a quick stark ruling so things do not bog down too much, combat moves slow enough already.

But out of combat is another matter. Recent example is a player asking a question based on a magic item she wanted to purchase. The DM interpreted the rules one way, the entire party interpreted a different way. The DM played the old "I am the LAW" routine because its "his game" and flat out stated all rules no matter what were his to decide.

That really offended me and quite honestly pissed me off. Yes a DM knows the campaign and thus speaks from greater knowledge on some things. But basic interpretation of the rules out of combat is not one of those situations.

Where in the NW suburbs? I used to drive to Arlington Heights once a week from the South suburbs for a game and I am looking for one again.

Far NW Burbs, Crystal Lake region.

Moriartty wrote:

Player, or DM if neccesary, looking to start a Pathfinder group in the Chicago northwest suburbs.

I am interested in a game that meets once a week or once every two weeks on the weekends. Weeknights are possible but game could not start before 7pm.

Drop a note if interested or know a group.

I am moving away from my group in the NW suburbs they need players.

Where in the NW burbs and why are you leaving the group?

Player, or DM if neccesary, looking to start a Pathfinder group in the Chicago northwest suburbs.

I am interested in a game that meets once a week or once every two weeks on the weekends. Weeknights are possible but game could not start before 7pm.

Drop a note if interested or know a group.

Positives

1. Increased damage ability of melee classes is nice.

2. Less shoehorned races. The changes to races make it possible to build some races beyond their "given" classes without gimping them.

3. Polymorph. This was just horribly abuseable.

4. More cookies for monks. Nice to see some new abilities.

5. No more auto-defensive casting. Especially with the fighter feats one can take a wizard can no longer ignore melee opponents and cast away.

Negatives
1. Prestiege classes listed in book are too arcane caster biased. No choices for monk or druid while even the bard has multiple good choices. The core book should help all of the core classes equally.

2. Have to upgrade just about anything 3.5 now to offset all of the new cookies characters get. So now 3.5 is not straight compatible but a bit subpar compare to Pathfinder.

3. Cleric Domanins. As someone else mentioned these are not balanced at all. Some are decent while others just stink.

4. Monk still doesnt really work. I can stand there and swing like crazy or I can run like the road runner. Why nothing in between?

5. Fighter only feats. Sure there should be some benefit for fighters but make it so they can get the feats sooner or go deeper into the chain. Make them 100% exclusive means they might as well be special abilities instead of feats.

ChrisRevocateur wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

- counterspelling still useless.

Actually, I disagree. I had a Ftr/Wiz that started in 3.0 and continued into 3.5. His main tactic was using Dispel Magic to counter anything that a wizard threw at him, run up, and next round, cut the bastard down.

To which I'm forced to wonder: Why didn't you just run up to the guy and cut him down in the first place instead of wasting a round (or more) holding an action just in case he cast a spell?

Probably because only the biggest buffoon of any enemy mage is going to start casting at the fighter while within one move action of said fighter. ;-)

If you cannot get to wizard and attack that round then making a single move and holding a dispel magic is smarter than getting almost to him but not quite and hoping to survive whatever he nukes you with magically.

lastknightleft wrote:

You tell your players the DCs they have to meet?

No, but they're all observant and good at math.

Robert Carter 58 wrote:

Yeah... for all the good things I hear about pathfinder, I hear many things I don't like.

The fact that you're hearing as many good things as bad is amazingly positive for any product. Remember, people are more likely to complain than applaud.

This would apply somewhere like EN World which is a bit more neutral of a site. But would not apply here, so it depends on where he is hearing these comments. Here positive hugely outweigh negative if you take Paizo's messageboard as a whole. In fact if you speak negatively in the wrong way, or to the wrong people, in this forum you can be nearly flamed by hating fanbois.

More Questions

4. Does activating a weird science device provoke an AOO?

5. If I create an item with multiple items do they happen in order? Lets say I create an item with True strike and Searing Touch. Do I get the +20 to hit when rolling the touch attack of the Searing spell?

6. Can a weird science item have multiples of the same spell? Say a magic bazooka with 3 fireballs spells in it.

Couple of Questions

1. Weird Science Devices - Can they emulate domain spells as well? I know most domain spells are also on the cleric or wizard list but there are (or at least were) some that were only a domain spell. Can I make a device to copy them as well?

2. Anti magic - Do weird science devices work within an anti-magic field? I assume they are fully magical and would be suppressed in the field and could be defeated by SR or a dispel magic just like the spell they are copying.

3. Metamagic Feats - I assume I could use any meta feat I wanted when created my devices.

Moriartty wrote:

He may be lazy, inexperienced, or not have the time to do much beyond basic game prep. Two of these reasons I cannot fault. The third suggests the DM should really be a player instead of a DM. A good DM will let some minor points become big points. Some will let them remain minor points. Variety and gentle prodding can go a long way to make things more enjoyable and less predictable.

Interesting point....you got to be kidding if your saying that any DM that has no time to go over a "purchased" module or AP should not be a DM but a player.

I have been reading this thread for a while, staying neutral. But that just blows my top off. I have been playing (A)D&D since 1979, and started GMing in the mid 80s of the last century. If you are implying that people (GMs) who don"t have enough time to "perfect" any "GAME" because they have a full time job, kids and other commitments out here in the real world, should better not Gamemaster any Games, than here is a piece of advice to your Gamemaster: Take Money from your players for all the work you (the GM) have put into the campaign, cause it seems there are people in your group who don't seem to appreciate you, or the small amount or big amount of your spare time that you invest in your campaign so that players like Moriartty can have fun.

My bad. When I wrote that I assumed it would be obvious which ones I meant. I excuse an inexperienced or a busy DM. A LAZY DM though in my opinion should be a player and not a DM. I say this because a lazy DM probably has the wrong mindset or attitude to be a DM.

My apologies if I wrote that badly.

There is certainly room for improvement.

Power attack is a two for one feat. You gain two points of damage (three with a two-hander) for every point of attack you give up. Why not make Combat Expertise the same way? Make it give you two points of AC for every lost attack point? You could even mirror Power Attack more and make it a three for one if a shield is used. Then you add huge utility to being a sword and board player.

If you think that is too powerful then back it down a little. Make it a one for one feat normal and a two for one feat with a shield.

It seems as though you just answered your own original question. The problem lies not so much with the AP in itself, as evidenced by the numerous posters who agree that CotCT is a fine adventure. Instead, it seems as though your main problem in enjoying the adventure has more to do with your DM not being able to adjust when the players want to deviate from the railroad tracks a teensy bit.

So how can we help you with that? We can't. Not really. Unless maybe you can gently prod your woeful and inflexible DM onto these boards where he'll have a dozen Campaign Journals for CotCT to read over and access to dozens more helpful people who have DMed this path already.

Even if he never gets good at coming up with stuff off the cuff, he'll have plenty of ideas to steal from when the players don't strictly follow the path as written.

That wasnt my point at all. My entire post was a reply to the previous posters comment on the Gun and how everything must be directly related to the main plot in an AP. He commented that an AP has to be written that way to keep from frustrating players who follow tangents not related to the main plot.

I disagreed and said that would only be a problem with a DM who refused to deviate or think outside the AP. I made no comment about my current campaign at all. As would be obvious I have no idea how close to the written AP our DM is following, nor will I know until the AP is over and that is assuming I decide to read the modules.

Moriartty wrote:

I did not say this was a problem, just stating a fact. The nature of an AP makes them predictable. There really is no way around it since this is not an open campaign. If you create a plague in an AP then of course the party knows they will be the key to solving it. By the same token if there is a group of NPCs who are supposed to be fighting the plague and they are obviously creepy then how can you think anything other than "evil baddies we will have to kill eventually". Sure its interesting in character to finally find the evidence your gut and meta thinking told you was there all along.

Beyond that we have a Chekov's Gun effect going on here. If you introduce something with any detail at all then its important to make sure that this something plays an important role in the plot line. This is important in novels, movies and plays etc. but its especially important in RPGs. Since there is a certain amount of static between what the DM is trying to convey in regards to the plot and what the players are picking up you don't want to put a lot of detail into some aspect unless you want your players to pick up on this and play off it.

Now that does not necessarily mean that every background aspect of a setting is always important. If your in the seedy part of town full of crime lords it may well not be the case that eventually you'll clean up this area and eliminate the crime lords. Could be your just passing through to get some info and then you'll be on your merry way.

In fact even extreme events are not always solved. In the adventure A Hot Day in L'Trel, there is an event that starts a fire storm through out a medieval fantasy city. Chances are the players will never get to the bottom of what actually caused the fire and its not really important - the fire serves as a background to the adventure, but its true that by and large if there is an outbreak of Lycanthropy in the village the players will probably eventually succeed in the adventure by identifying the...

I agree with most of your points. What I do not agree with is that everything must have meaning or it becomes frustrating. This is DnD. Between divination and player effort almost any mystery can be solved or at least enough information gathered to let a party know if they want to pursue it or not. As your example about the firestorm. It means nothing to the adventure plot wise. But a firestorm is a horribly destructive event. A good aligned cleric or paladin may want to investigate to find out why so many people died. This is only a problem if the DM is such a slave to the module that he stonewalls the players. Gaming is supposed to be about fun, if a party latches onto a minor point and it interests them all so much they turn it into a major point then by god as a decent DM you better expand on it some. Maybe the firestorm is the result of coincidences that aligned right between weather and a lightning storm, or maybe its a half insane mid-level cleric who worships the para-elemental lord of Magma and opened a small rift. Does it take that much work to create a quick villian for the party to deal with and earn a nice sense of satisfaction?

Here is an example. I was running a cleric in a Kingdom of Kalamar campaign. Throughout most of the campaign we had a reoccuring nemesis, an evil cleric, who fought us constantly and always tried to thwart our actions. By the time we finally cornered and killed him the entire party was determined to end his spree of trouble for us.

So you know where this cleric came from origionally? Me. At second level we got in a small battle and one of the foes was a no name mook cleric. Instead of dying in battle he was captured. We decided to question him to see why him and his band of orcs had attacked us. During the interrogation my cleric of vengeance was probably a bit too aggressive. After the interrogation the evil cleric was able to escape when an actual plot relevant attack happened. The evil cleric escaped and the DM instantly decided that my actions had created the perfect opportunity to create a paty nemesis. He got a pretty good laugh out of it almost a year later when the campaign ended and he told us all the full story.

The real problem lies with a DM who refuses to think outside the box or does not have time to think outside the box. He has purchased an AP and by golly he is going to run it exactly as written with no deviation. He may be lazy, inexperienced, or not have the time to do much beyond basic game prep. Two of these reasons I cannot fault. The third suggests the DM should really be a player instead of a DM. A good DM will let some minor points become big points. Some will let them remain minor points. Variety and gentle prodding can go a long way to make things more enjoyable and less predictable.

Moriartty wrote:

There is really nothing you can spoil in an AP, other than post statblocks or specific encounter details. They are too predictable.

Perhaps you should write your own adventures then, as others have said in both of the threads you've started.

It is obvious you aren't happy, and if you think the problem is the AP then by all means quit it.

I did not say this was a problem, just stating a fact. The nature of an AP makes them predictable. There really is no way around it since this is not an open campaign. If you create a plague in an AP then of course the party knows they will be the key to solving it. By the same token if there is a group of NPCs who are supposed to be fighting the plague and they are obviously creepy then how can you think anything other than "evil baddies we will have to kill eventually". Sure its interesting in character to finally find the evidence your gut and meta thinking told you was there all along.

I still find it funny that people cannot look at something objectively. There is lots of very emotional responses from people who really should have no reason to be so emotionally invested in a product they did not create. Is it really such a personal attack on some of these players idols to suggest that the campaign could be better by starting it with some light intown events while things are normal to create player attachment to the town in addition to their character's attachment that they have to roleplay.

Oh as a side note our DM is not using experience. He is just telling us to level when he things it is appropriate. So the slightly larger party really shouldnt matter overall.

Are we going to be able to pull off the end portion of this module at our current level?

Ask your DM.

We have cleared out the upper floor of the "hospital" and preparing to go underground. We have leveled but since we cannot rest and gain benefits like spells which kind of sucks. Non-casters basically get everything in a situation like this while casters get nothing.

We could leave and come back but the storyline situation would be a mess. Either whoever is downstairs will clear out or go and get massive Grey Maiden reinforcements which would be a pain.

I guess we charge below and hope for the best.

Moriartty wrote:

<snip> I had stopped reading this thread a while ago mostly because the whole point of my post went over the head of most of the posters who like fanboys just started screaming how awesome Paizo is and nothing better could be done. <snip>

[sarcasm] What a shame that we don't agree with you. So far you have started two threads, both of which harp on how bad the AP line is, and you don't seem to get a lot of sympathy in either one.

I don't see us as "fanboys" (a term of derision thrown out by those that don't like something at those that do -- and a term I am finding I despise). I see a large group of players and GMs, some who have run this AP more than once, trying to answer your questions and queries only to see you dismiss our advice and information as being wrong or irrelavent to what you really wanted -- us to jump on your hate bandwagon.

Sorry to disappoint you. [/sarcasm]

Hey, Gary, if you're reading, I think you can stick a fork in this thread as being done ;p

Oh I hurt your feeling so your running off to someone to have the thread closed. How sad.

Fanboys are the ones to ran into the thread screaming its the best AP they have ever seen and nothing of course could be done to make it even a bit better.

What really should I expect though. I bet if I check I am still the only person to not give a 5 in their review of the new Pathfinder book.

tbug wrote:

Tiger Lily wrote:

Players should not be reading these threads as it amounts to cheating.

But if you check the OP you'll see that this thread was started by a player in order to give feedback on his play experience.

...which is perfectly fine once the campaign is done, at which point the spoiler point is moot because the player isn't a player anymore. However, even some of the thread TITLES can be spoilers based on how DMs are structuring their campaigns and how close to the chest they are playing their cards. So I still say... players reading the boards are GOING to pick up information they shouldn't regardless of how liberally the spoiler button is used.

Oh I am sorry. Was I supposed to ask YOUR permission before I start a thread in this forum? Gee, I must have missed that rule.

I had stopped reading this thread a while ago mostly because the whole point of my post went over the head of most of the posters who like fanboys just started screaming how awesome Paizo is and nothing better could be done.

I came back out of curiosity since the thread seemed to take on a life of its own. A very light skimming and ignoring of posts with spoiler tags didnt tell me anything I dont already know.

Oh and I hate to break it to you. There is really nothing you can spoil in an AP, other than post statblocks or specific encounter details. They are too predictable.

Lets see....

Plague killing everyone - Players will find cure and/or whoever is spreading it.

Introduce creepy doctor with creepy assistant in masks - players will end up killing both.

New squad of goons loyal only to the obviously evil usurper of the throne - Player will end up killing them

Queen suddenly gains power - Gee she is either possessed, replaced, or controlled by some BBE (Big Bad Evil).

Interesting. I can see your point that the paranoid will of course think everything is related. Its the downside to television and movies where everything is of course is related.

I am probably not the best person to argue against that though. My preferred style is gothic horror and evil society. In games like that everything really is part of a big dark plot to take your soul and the universe.

As for the slow start. I guess I can understand that if the players are anxious for the world shaking events but small "get to know the place" adventures can be just as fun if designed so as to not feel like filler. I guess its a pretty hard line to walk.

Moriartty wrote:

Korvosa doesnt have to be normal. But a bit of adventuring before everything goes to hell might make players actually care somewhat when things do go to hell.

Surely that's a GM issue, not a publisher issue. They gave us Korvosa as a source book with lots of ideas on what to do. When my players were getting ready to play and deciding on character concepts and such it became clear that they'd enjoy gaming for a while before the king died, so I just ran a few sessions like that before setting them against Lamm. This was easy because of all the support material Paizo provided (plus the advice of the amazing people on this very board).

I think that a GM needs to figure out how to make this stuff the most fun for his/her players. Since it's different for everyone Paizo can't really script it too much, but I think that they did a fine job in this case.

Note that I'm agreeing with your basic point. :) It is more fun to adventure a bit first before starting the AP!

To me it is a Publisher issue to a degree. Sure as a DM you can throw some adventures in to create background, but you are limited. Too much and players may acquire wealth or levels that make the first module a cakewalk or force the DM to modify parts. Thats why it should be built into the path.

Moonbeam wrote:

I love the Curse of the Crimson Throne AP, it's my favorite one so far. But I agree with the OP. I think it would be great to have at least a few games for the players to get to know the "normal" Korvosa at the start of the campaign before all hell breaks loose. It would make the "abnormal" events of the rest of the campaign seem much more drastic in comparison!

I totally agree that running a small adventure as a prequel to the first part of the AP would help create this atmosphere.

I thought the point was that Korvosa wasn't supposed to have a "normal" atmosphere.

** spoiler omitted **

Korvosa doesnt have to be normal. But a bit of adventuring before everything goes to hell might make players actually care somewhat when things do go to hell.

Okay, this is in no way a rip the module thread. I am just going to throw out my idea for making this Adventure Path better. Anyone is free to comment or add their own ideas.

As a side note I am a player in a campaign that I think is about 3/4 of way through the second module. So please limit the spoilers.

-------------------

My idea is simple. As far as I understand the AP it is supposed to take a party of 4 from 1st to about 16th level. During the AP the party is to be heroic defenders/saviors of the city.

Now here is the problem I have. The first module starts out too fast. The King dies, the Queen takes over, Blackjack saves the poor painter, and then the second module starts with the plague.

There needs to be more than this. In my opinion 1st through 4th level should happen in the city but without major changes in the city. The King should live this entire time. He players should work for the Guard, maybe the Sable Company, but there should be a good 4 or 5 sessions worth of stuff where the party does stuff and has stuff doen for them by the city. If done well by 4th or 5th level then the players really will be attached to Korvosa and the people in the city.

Then at this point start the actual AP, kill the King and start everything rolling. If the prelude is done well enough the players wont have to "roleplay" their characters loving and wanting to save the city, they themselves will have become attached to a degree and want to do it.

Do this well and even the railroading will not seem so bad because you will have gotten your players emotionally invested in the town, in Kroft, in the Kings death, etc etc.

Right now as written things go to hell way too fast and there is no time to become comfortable with Korvosa and thus be upset when she starts to fall apart.

Opinions?

Okay, I can see your point.

Now to light the path to realization. Conversion: there are splat books for a reason.

I know, I know its not Pathfinder. So? Convert the Kensai or Frenzied Berserker for your fighters and barbarians, Black Flame Zealot for your sneaky clerics or Knight of the Chalice for your demon slayers.

You have a problem with the arcane PrCs? Convert the Occult Slayer.

This may not work for you, but it is one solution.

All options I agree. I just feel that the core book of the rules should have as rounded a selection of skills, feats, PrCs, and magic items to give every class an equal chance to excel. The current selection of PrCs does not do this.

So the argument is that there are no good PrCs for fighter types? Some one needs to tell the Dragon Disciples that...

With its requirement to take a level in sorcerer with a specific bloodline I would not call it a fighter focused class. Though, now that we can have "pretty" half-orcs it might be fun to see half-orc barbarian/sorcerer dragon disciples.

The arguement is not that there are no good fighter PrCs' The arguement is that PrCs are too arcane focused and some classes are completely ignored.

You want to have a problem with the PrC classes listed in the new Pathfinder book? Here its simple:

Lets list them out

Arcane archer - Elven mage fighter archer
Arcane Trickster - Arcane Thief
Assassin - Evil thief baddie
Dragon Disciple - ANOTHER arcane based PrC
Duelist - Fighter based swshbuckler
Elderich Knight - YET ANOTHER arcane based PrC
Loremaster - Spellcaster PrC but HD drop makes it more arcane than divine.
Mystic Theurge - Divine and Arcane PrC
Pathfinder Chronicler - Bard based PrC
Shadowdancer - Rogue of Bard based PrC

What do we see here? How many choices for a druid that are decent? How many choices for a monk? How about a cleric without taking a HD nick with the Loremaster. How about a ranger that isnt an elf. What about a barbarian?

The problem with the PrC's listed is they are completely arcane caster bloated and completely ignore some other classes. There are 10 PrC's listed and 5 of them require the ability to cast arcane spells.

neceros wrote:

Offering redemption at sword point is an evil act. :)

This is one of those areas where you're wrong unless you're right.

If conversion really IS a Good Thing for the universe at large (as well as for the person being converted), then forcing someone to convert at swordpoint is a laudable and heroic act. At the very least, it's more Good than killing them outright would be (and we've long established that executing an evil creature is often a good act).

It's only when what you are trying to "convert" them to ISN'T objectively and unambiguously good that it becomes loathsome and evil to force the point.

I would say wrong. Freedom of will is the greatest good that exists. No matter how justified conversion by force is evil because it takes away personal freedom. At that point no matter what you have commited evil.

As for it saving the Universe. It doesnt matter. True good never reduces itself to the arugment "the ends justify the means".

I did grapple the mage which did end the fight, though it did last a while.

I didnt particularly want to grapple the hag with the death stare while fighting in her natural domain underwater. She also has nasty claws.

Same with the were-rat. Wasnt too keen on grappling something that can give my lycanthropy. It didnt help either that the were-rat was hitting for 20 plus damage a round and knocked me unconcious the 3rd round of combat. My character had a 19 AC in that fight and that was no challenge for him to hit and I have the best AC in the party.

I have considered upping my grapple ability as much as possible but its really a human or human similar target ability. The more "monster" a foe is the less you really want to grapple it.

I have considered switching to a cleric and then at 7th level taking the Leadership feat and bringing back the monk as a cohort. Might be interesting.

Yeah, the spell levels are going to be extra rough considering the party makeup.

Barbarian
Sorcerer
Thief
Paladin
Monk

So we are completely lacking in decent healing. The current joke is that the first person to die has to roll up cleric since we need one pretty badly. Depending on how they look in revised Pathfinder I may just swap out my character the monk for a cleric for party benefit.

Someone posted that the ship first appears at the beginning of the module but you do not explore it till just about the end. Which is obviously true, if you arrived at the ship at 4th level the hag would be a nightmare. Though I would like to point out that the hag had a shark animal companion which suggests she was not on the ship from the start but moved in after the ship sank. If this is the case then a party that explored immediatly could get there before the hag was there and thus avoid the tough encounter.

But another question. What level should we be at the end of this module series? We have just been told to go investigate the good doctor which to me sounds like close to the climax of the module. We are all 5th level, and there are 5 of us.

So far we have:

escorted the not assasin
stopped the perfume/cure fraud
killed the vampires
killed the were-rat
just finished capturing the goth-elf in the party manor

Oh and we averted the Grey Maidens from slaughtering a crowd of almost rioting civilians.

Are we going to be able to pull off the end portion of this module at our current level?

To add the question passed about the Barbarian.

5th level halforc barbarian

21 strength (18 +2 racial +1 level)

Masterwork weapon (now a +1 weapon I believe)

Weapon Focus

This means that when not raging he is +12 to hit (+5 lvl, +5 strength, +1 weapon, +1 weapon focus)

When raging add +2 more to make it +14 to hit.

Nothing impossible by the rules. He has a 16 con and all other stats are between 7 and 11.

Moriartty wrote:

The were-rat and harlequin were also shielded as discovered when our party sorceress threw magic missles at them.

I'm not going to get into stat block spoilers, but your GM really needs to work on his attention to detail.

Not an area I can comment on.

But when the lvl 5 barbarian with 21 strength BEFORE he rages misses while raging the party gets a bit upset. Maybe the DM is modding stuff to his benefit to make up for allowing a character that has a +14 to hit and +11 to damage with his favorite two-handed weapon into the game. To answer your question yes, other than his Con score every other stat really sucks.

(This is assuming he is doing this) Now if you do this to make it a challenege for the barbarian then you seriously screw the poor monk who only has a +6 to hit. I love it when every big baddie we enounter requires a 19 or 20 to hit unles I flank, in which case I merely need a 17 or 18.

But that is a completely different kind of complaint.

fray wrote:

How do you know that every bad guy is buffed?

I wondered the same, and upon checking noted that the wererat in question was blurred, the hag was barkskinned and the harlequin was invisible. Those are all pretty obvious. From the OP's stories, only Griggiz seems to have been inappropriately buffed, though.

The were-rat and harlequin were also shielded as discovered when our party sorceress threw magic missles at them.

Moriartty wrote:

Then quite frankly this is a very poorly designed series of modules. There are lots of ways to lead characters by their noses in an adventure path without going to RPG version of Inspector Gadget and the explosing mission note at the beginning of every "episode" of the adventure.

Thanks for the information. Basically I can sit back, let the scenary go by and defeat the monsters it drops off in front of me.

One would think though that an Adventure Path based around a city with the complex relations that exist in the city would deviate from this path at least a little bit. But obviously that was too complex an idea.

One might think that... but that is just a thought. That doesn't have to be the case at all. In fact, if you play the rest of the AP I wonder if you wont become surprised. Quite possibly, you might be very wrong just maybe sorta kinda.

No Spoilers though
you'll just have to wait and see.

I am just going by what another poster said, that being lead by our noses by NPCs is the modus operandi for the entire path throught the modules. I would be very happy to learn that is not true.

So if your main question is - will the adventure more or less be about getting adventure ops from NPCs etc. and then going on those adventure ops then the answer is yes - that is exactly what the campaign will be about.

Then quite frankly this is a very poorly designed series of modules. There are lots of ways to lead characters by their noses in an adventure path without going to RPG version of Inspector Gadget and the explosing mission note at the beginning of every "episode" of the adventure.

Thanks for the information. Basically I can sit back, let the scenary go by and defeat the monsters it drops off in front of me.

One would think though that an Adventure Path based around a city with the complex relations that exist in the city would deviate from this path at least a little bit. But obviously that was too complex an idea.

Moriartty wrote:

That and the constantly buffed and preped enemies is getting annoying.

I just can't understand why this is a problem. Buffing is part of the game; if the players are allowed to buff, then it stands to reason that the mosters have just as much a chance to do so, if they have potions or spells. It's up to the PCs to change their tactics, or, if it's really that much of a problem, then you should talk to your GM about it.

I've never read a published module that didn't have an NPC or monster buffing when it logically would, it would make no sense.

The problem has been that every single major foe has been fully buffed, often by spells that only last a few minutes, even though said foe does not know exactly when the party is going to arrive.

The example above was the were-rat. By our actions the were-rat should have buffed himself then had them all wear out since we approached right up to the room he was in then left and went another direction for what had to be 30 minutes or more of real time. If he didnt buff then but later then how did he know exactly when to buff since our halfling thief actually snuck up on him without being spotted. Sure he could hear the big loud barbarian in the distance but that doesnt tell him we are going to attack them any more then. It would have looked just like the first time and if he didnt buff the first time then why did he buff the second?

I dont want this to be bashing the DM. I am more curious if this Adventure Path as written is going to deviate from the current pattern.

NPC #1 shows up and gives mission.

NPC #2 shows up and gives mission.

Kroft summons party and gives mission.

Friendly neighborhood cleric shows up and gives mission.

NPC #3 shows up and gives mission.

End Module.

Rinse and repeat for next module.

That and the constantly buffed and preped enemies is getting annoying.

I think that this is a case of reading the "before combat" sections of the stat blocks and thinking that it always happens before combat. Unfortunately, this isn't always the case. The wererat definatly would have been buffed... The hag, it depends on when she notices the party.. if she had 2 rounds then yes, she would have both buffs on. less than that, prolly not.

Not really on the were-rat. We killed all his minions in the other room with the shrieker mushroom, went a bit further down the hall then the party thief convinced everyone to turn around and head down another path. This resulted in us fighting sewer tentacle monster, lifting some gate and wandering who knows how long in the normal sewers before deciding that we had to backtrack. Then we headed back to shrieker room, where the shrieker was already dead due to angry barbarian, continued down the path and within a few minutes found a were-rat that was hiding behind cover waiting to ambush us.

So at what point did he buff himself? When the shroom screamed? Sorry those would have worn off by the time we returned. If he buffed when we came back how did he know we were there? The rogue was scouting and actually found the were-rat before he found us. Basically we had a foe that was allowed to be fully buffed no matter when we encountered him.

Have you tried telling your GM that you'd prefer a less railroady game?

To be honest yes I have. I suggested to him and everyone else that maybe we should leave town for a couple days and seek our fortune (or borrow by force) the fortune of someone else, AKA good old kill the monsters raid the dungeon.

The DM very quickly said that this was not the adventure path and that we would not be deviating from it. The "in-character" explanation is that we all love the city so much that we would not even think of doing anything except help the city every waking second of our lives. Unfortunately that requires us to sit around and wait for the next NPC to knock on our door and ask us for help. I am starting to think I should have made the DnD version of Michael Weston and call all these NPCs my clients. I could even complete the image by getting myself burn-notice backstory by getting kicked out of the city guard.

My party wanted to check out the boat too. I gave them their 'road maps' (clues from the NPC's) and they went a different direction. When they got to the boat one of my players was all "See! I told you!". If they would have went earlier characters would have died. (I can only fudge so many die rolls...)

Yeah, CotCT is a bit "yellow brick road" but most prewritten modules are.
It's still a great adventure.
Yes, there will be a few more forks in the roads coming up where the party gets to do stuff. In the end though, the road leads where it leads...

Which leads back to another point that is starting to irritate the entire party. As written almost every single big baddie we have encountered is, through no fault of our own but by the way the adventure is written, has had plenty of time to throw every conceivable buff spell on themself.

Goth-elf
Sea hag
Were-rat boss

All got as much time as needed to buff, yet knew just when to cast spells so that our dallying around did not expire their spell/scroll/potion durations. Each of them had armor class values in the mid to upper 20's after buffing. I am starting to think that every time we enter an area we should randomly make a ton of noise then sit on our asses for 30 minutes so the big bad bosses buff up expecting us then have their spells expire. Not that this would work of course, but its getting frustrating. If I run into one more shielded/barkskinned/blurred/cats graced/mage armored foe again I am just going to puke. One of these time I would like to see us walk in just as the baddie starts to drink that second potion, instead of conveniently 10 seconds after he finished drinking the last. So is that poor DMing or is every one of these foes statted out in the module fully buffed.

Plus - an adventure path is not a campaign. It's railroady by nature - there's an epic storyline that your characters follow. Sometimes with sandboxy periods, but frequently more like a book unfolding.

Well this is not a very well written one. The railroading is so obvious that the entire party knows we are just here to roll the dice and kill whatever monsters the NPCs point us at.

I will disagree with one thing. Epic is when a character or party choses to do things based on what is going on around them. COTCT is not epic. Its not the party being epic, more along the lines of epic being the party.

True, but as far as I can tell everything that goes on in the module to date has been based off NPCs who come to the party asking for help. If that is the case then nothing is written in the module for if the party wants to be proactive or have any initiative. Like I said, comes down to playing through a book that has already been written. The only question that really comes up is how many characters die through the whole thing and if there are any TPKs during the series.

As for DM style. I am not going to comment on that at all for obvious reasons. This is more about how the Adventure Path is written. I just hope it opens up some in the module or in later modules.

Okay, in a group that is on the second COTCT module. Plague is hitting the city hot and heavy and citizens are dying left and right.

I have no idea how far into the module we are but we just captured a goth-elf who was playing with dead nobles.

This is what is bothering me. This whole campaign to date has been the biggest railroad since the Dragonlance module series, minus the epic feel that DL had.

One example, since the very beginning of the module my character, a former sailer, has wanted to explore the ship sunk by the town guard. The DM has basically refused to allow this by making it impossible to find the actual location of the ship.

Why?

This makes no sense till the session before last. In that session a were-rat came along, asked us to kill her murderous brethren and as a reward will tell us where the ship sunk since she happened to know where it went down. So basically we couldnt explore the ship until the module storyline told us we could. Yawn to say the least, though I admit this is not really the DM's fault if that is how the module is written.

No this is the annoying part. On the ship we find important evidence. We find the death boxes, we find the body of a cleric of the god of disease and undeath, and we find a receipt showing that the "doctor" who the Queen hired to save the city actually owns this ship of plague.

All of this would be very useful information we could have had 5 sessions earlier and used.

I do not feel so much that I am playing a RPG as much as living someone's conversion of a Raymond Feist novel or a chose your own adventure book we all loved when we were nine years old.

Please tell me this adventure path gets better and the players start to get to make real decisions. I want to know that if need be my character could leave town for a day trip without waiting for it to come up in module number four, page 22, paragraph 6, line 2, when the module "tells" me I decide to leave town.