NuclearPotato's page

I was thinking of starting up a new group with my buddies. We've moved to Pathfinder in our other games, and this caused a few headaches in Curse of the Crimson Throne and Rise of the Runelords, because the DM had to convert all of the NPCs.

This time around I want to avoid that and just use an adventure that was written using the PFRPG, with the monsters all statted up using the new rules.

Since the PFRPG and Second Darkness both came out around the same time, I was wondering if it used the 3.5 rules, or the PFRPG rules. It looks like a really fun adventure, but I really don't want to be converting baddies for hours if I can help it.

Sorry, but Second Darkness (and the adventure path after it, Legacy of Fire) uses 3.5 rules. The first adventure path to use PFRPG rules is Council of Thieves.

NuclearPotato wrote:

In order of most likely to appear in an AP to least likely, please rank these countries:

Absalom
Andoran
Irrisen
Osirion
Taldor

Thank you in advance.

Since I know the next 6 or so APs, and since folks KNOW I know that... I can't rank these without setting up false expectations or spoiling things we're not quite ready to reveal. So I won't.

Okay, fair enough. Let me ask this then: In the introduction to "The Brinewell Legacy," you gave tips on playing Jade Regent before Rise of the Runelords. Your advise for this can be summed up with the phrase "Just put a different family in there instead of the Kaijitsu's." My question: In the upcoming Rise of the Runelords hardcover, will there be an alternative family in place of the Kaijitsu's available for such an event? Or, will we just have to make our own family up in that case?

In order of most likely to appear in an AP to least likely, please rank these countries:

Absalom
Andoran
Irrisen
Osirion
Taldor

Thank you in advance.

The game I run does keep track of rations. However, considering that the campaign is currently centered around a city, the rations issue hasn't really come up, yet.

My vote went to "Shadows," but "Orphan's Blood" came in a pretty close second.

I like the idea of this archetype, but as everyone else has said before, I really don't think the abilities are worth trading in the rogue's trapfinding abilities. (Maybe if you allowed the option to take trapfinding and its ilk as rogue talents?)

In any case, this one's got my vote.

NuclearPotato wrote:

Hello,

Quick question, when awarding story XP, should I award the listed amount to the party to divvy out amongst themselves, or do I award it to each individual character?

XP awards are always for the entire party, not individual PCs. Though if you mean to ask whether the GM or the players decide each PCs share, I think that's up to the party if you want to do something different than [total xp divided by the number of PCs].

Thanks for the clarification.

Hello,

Quick question, when awarding story XP, should I award the listed amount to the party to divvy out amongst themselves, or do I award it to each individual character?

Well, I have a final copy, and reading through that and comparing that to the relatively few MW3 supplements that I have, (I can't give a full explanation of the changes since I don't actually have MW3) I can say that the changes are as follows:

1: The system overall has been overhauled for maximum compatibility with Total Warfare.

2: In the process of maintaining compatibility, the system has gone from 2D10 to 2D6. When rolling, you're attempting to beat a target number (usually about 6 to 8 without modifiers)

3: Life Paths are still in the game, however, you are no longer required to roll for random events within those paths. There is also an optional XP only creation build.

4: SOC has been removed as an attribute.

I'll try to go through my PDF for a (somewhat) more in-depth analysis of things.