ParagonDireRaccoon's page

RPG Superstar 7 Season Dedicated Voter, 8 Season Dedicated Voter, 9 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 729 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 2 aliases.


1 to 50 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for the feedback Lorathorn and Set! I've figured out how to make it a sacred site for all dragons- the temple with no walls has spells inscribed on the ceiling, and dragons can switch out spells known with a long ceremony. The drakes that clean dragon scales are attracted to flowers that must be tended, and adventurers are occasionally given access to the mesa to tend to the flowers. And occasionally adventurers are hired to prepare the temple with no walls for the spell switchout ceremony (I'll have to think of a catchy name for the ceremony).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lorathorn wrote:

Will there be certain kinds of dragons? Might they have enchanted the area to connect it to another plane or make it inhospitable (thin air, high winds) to weaker creatures? There is a lot that can be done with this idea, and it is a good one.

Consider too that you could have a temple that has a roof but no walls, and can play with the wind moving through it, perhaps for harmonics or even as a deterrent from people entering it.

I like your ideas Lorathorn. Maybe the top of the mesa is a kind of extradimensional space/otherplanar space that partly exists in the Prime Material Plane. The roof with no walls has potential, a fantasy trope is the building that has more space on the inside than appears from the outside. The top of the mesa has a temple with no walls, that has more space than should be possible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Brokenlookinglass wrote:
I'll be honest, I'm fairly new to roleplaying, I've only been playing for less than 5 yrs now. But every group I join and play with has had an amazing distaste for the new Star Wars d20 game. Is it something that I'm missing for are they just upset because they feel Wizards nerfed the Jedi classes that much? I'll be honest, I never got a chance to play in a d6 game of Star Wars, so am I missing something from not having played that? Let me know please!

I enjoy Star Wars d20, and my old group played a campaign that ran about two and half years. There are several reasons I've seen why players may not like Star Wars d20:

1. The feat system penalizes you for not optimizing. I played a Jedi Ace in a group with two others playing Jedi, and mine was mechanically weak. I took the spacer feat because it made sense from a roleplaying perspective, but the mechanical benefits of a force user feat are significant. The feat requirements for Jedi Ace are not optimal compared to other Jedi prestige classes.

2. Jedi are mechanically much stronger than other classes. You could build Han Solo as a jedi consular and he could have similar skill points along with a lot of powerful force abilities.

3. The d6 mechanic of the original Star Wars rpg had flaws at times, but was generally more cinematic and had faster paced combat. The 3rd ed. D&D action economy lends itself to optimizing for combat, which in turn favors jedi characters.

There were upsides to the combat mechanics, a soldier can generally deal more damage per round than other classes and is strong in combat, the scoundrel is a lot of fun to play and 'better lucky than good' is a great mechanic, the noble can be fun to play. The combinations of species and class can be fun. But Star Wars d20 needs a group that is on the same page, more than most systems. Our group played a six month story arc as Firefly-style smugglers when we got our first light transport, the GM had to wing it a bit. But there's a lot of room for the mechanics to cause issues, and a lot of room for the mechanics to not work for the kind of Star Wars game players would like.

Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm really impressed with the quality, especially the last few days. I think I have upvoted every kind of weapon, armor, shield, and wondrous item at some point. There are quality items of every kind.

I have also had to break some of my tiebreakers- if two items are fairly equal generally I'll lean towards more interesting name, more original concept or execution, or simply more concise or better formatted. But sometimes re-reading items makes me upvote an overly wordy or not perfectly formatted item if the abilities work together nicely. Those items may not make the top 32 (ideally nice ability synergy is made clear on the first read through) but some are nicely done.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I downloaded my pdf today (I backed the kickstarter but was busy with school until now). I really like Quests of Doom. I'm a big Frog God Games fan, I have Rappan Athuk and Return to the Tomb of Horrors Complete in the Pathfinder versions. I've skimmed all of the adventures and read a few more thoroughly. They have a lot of the best qualities of 1E in my opinion. I recently bought pdfs of a lot of 1E adventures recently, the Quests of Doom have new magic items and artifacts, dangerous traps, and are designed for the classic D&D party configuration (one or two fighters, divine caster, arcane caster, and rogue). They are less lethal than Rappan Athuk but will challenge players. I recommend Quests of Doom if you like 0E, 1E, and 2E style adventures or like Rappan Athuk and Slumbering Tsar.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you get a chance to post how it went, I'd love to hear about it. And thanks for giving me a reason to look through my copy of Bastion of Broken Souls, it's one of my favorite adventures from any edition.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You could make Myra the Dragonhearted a cleric of Lamashtu or Dahak (from Inner Sea Gods). I really like what Pathfinder has done with bard- Pemoka might be cool with the Flamedancer archetype (ACG) for flavor but the base bard is pretty cool.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I ran the encounter tonight as a test run before running the whole adventure in two weeks. The Kender antipaladin/swashbuckler was surprisingly effective, with high AC and saves and solid to-hit and damage (both based on Dex instead of Str). The Minotaur Urban Ranger with TWF was a mistake, as Just a Mort pointed out. With two weapon rend he could solo a head with a dual-hit but he rolled poorly, one hit with THF is better than two misses with TWF. The Dwarf Cleric performed as expected but I'll replace her with a LN Elf Cleric of Zivilyn with archery and positive energy channeling, keeping melee characters alive is better than the negative channel (although negative channel hitting all five heads a round was pretty strong). The wizard shined, but only survived two rounds as the party made nine of ten Will saves against dazing magic missile effects. I counted each head as an individual target with its own save, and the players rolled very well. I weighted the combat a little heavily in favor of the players and their hydragon, assuming the wizard would daze a few heads for a round in the opening round.

I think I'll replace the Minotaur TWF Urban Ranger with DUM Under The Bridge's suggest Ranger/Barbarian archer. Urban Ranger 3/Barbarian 7 provides trapfinding and the archery lets the bad guy party spread out to avoid breath weapons. The Kender solo'd a head with two hits in a round (one of the critical). One melee character is enough. And I'm going to add tail slap and wing buffet to the hydra so the players have more options than breath weapon and bite attack. I'll play around with a few wands attached to hydragon backpack that a player can activate with the tail on their turn in place of an attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like all the suggestions. I'm thinking half-dragon (added to half-orc) archaeologist bard for a melee/trapfinding/bard spell combo (not one-trick, but all melee with orc ferocity and healing spells for the one encounter), sword-and-board antipaladin with cornugon smash, blaster as described by thegreenteagamer with dazing spell, the one trick is dazing magic missile, and samsaran oracle with mystic past life and the heal as a fifth level spell from the adept spell list.

This could be brutal for either side. Each head of the chromatic hydra is run by a different player, and each gets to choose one feat for their head (in addition to the shared feats of the body). Each will roll initiative separately, and they'll roll each turn to see who controls moving the body. This makes it difficult for the GM-run characters in melee, as the hydragon might move twice between moves for the bad guy characters and will usually move on a different initiative each round. The heads can fire more than one breath weapon in a round, with a 1d4+1 round cooldown. So one or more bad guy characters could be killed in the opening round with poor reflex saves, but the dazing magic missiles can incapacitate heads for a turn.

It's a test run for a half-reverse dungeon adventure I'm working on, and it if it goes well I might turn the adventure into a downloadable pdf.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll probably replace the golems with warforged for the players to run, one of the guys loves warforged. It will be a one-shot set around level 12, with pre-gens available and the players can make characters if they would like/have time. I'll have a pool of pre-gens/potential adversary PCs, and probably use 3x5 cards with monster stats.

Thanks for the advice guys!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm working on an adventure partly in the style of the Reverse Dungeon. The Reverse Dungeon was an old-school adventure where the players played monsters defending a dungeon from adventurers (I've never played the Reverse Dungeon though). There was an adventure in Dungeon magazine in the 3E days where the PCs clear out a dungeon, then have to rebuild the defenses and defend it against a group of adventurers seeking the artifact within for evil purposes. I'm going to split the difference- two routes into the volcano lair of a red dragon guarding an artifact. The PCs are taking one route, while evil adventurers take the other. The players play the monsters on the other route and play their PCs (alternating encounters). The better the players play the monsters, the weaker the opponent adventurers will be for the final battle (after defeating the dragon, the PCs will be low on resources). Any thoughts or suggestions?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think part of the high expectations for every PF hardcover is that the Paizo designers do a great job, so we assume (probably rightfully so) that they could do a great job with a specific thing we'd like to see. If the things we would like to see are not in a book and things we feel 'meh' about are instead, there can be some disappointment.

We kind of have two different discussions going, with some overlap- what we would like to see, and what we expect to see in PF Unchained. I expect to see (imo) cool options that some people will love and a few people will be disappointed by. I also expect (and look forward to) an AP taking advantage of optional new material. I'd like to see options for different action resolution mechanics, alignments, and vancian casting. There have been threads on what are the sacred cows, and there tend to be a diversity of opinions. Most rpg players like some sacred cows and would like to see some replaced.

Martial vs. caster is a topic with a lot of opinions. A fair number of players would like to see an overhaul, but any overhaul would likely appeal to some and alienate others. Imo one of the larger issues is that martials mostly have abilities that are limited to the part of the game that takes place on a grid with minis, while casters have spells that affect the combat part of the game and also have greater options for affecting storytelling. I have high hopes for PF Unchained providing more options for martials, and providing options for spell mechanics. Imo PF improved on 3E mechanics, and some of the imbalances result from changes that benefit some classes more than others. The improvements to skills make it so any class can be good at stealth (or any skill). Rogues no longer have the near-monopoly on skills they once had. The improvements to base class features mean prestige classes are no longer 'cooler' by comparison.

Thanks for reading my ramble. I'm enjoying the discussions on what we'd like to see and what we expect to see.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Charon's Little Helper wrote:

In large part it depends upon just how much they're changing from the base game. Are these just alternate versions of the base classes? It's never been totally clear to me.

I'd be a big fan of more top heavy HP. That was one of the half dozen things that I really liked from 4e. Makes it so that a fluke crit from a greataxe wielding mook isn't instant death.

My guess is that PF Unchained will have a lot of optional rules, like alternate rules for alignment and spellcasting. If they have an optional alternate mechanic for moving and attacking as Pan suggests that would be cool. I really like Mythic Adventures and WotR, and I like the ACG and Technology Guide and Iron Gods looks great so far. Paizo seems to be introducing sourcebooks in tandem with an AP, the sourcebook provides new material and mechanics that are showcased in an AP. Pathfinder Unchained will probably have some rule options that are popular in the "do we need a new PF edition" thread, which is a great business model. I'd rather have the option of buying sourcebooks than have to buy a new edition every few years, or have to readjust the power level of the game every time a player buys a sourcebook (not naming any games in particular).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm tempted to leave it set in London in the early 1980s. Or a Shadowrun-style near future Seattle is an option (I'm a Shadowrun fan and used to live in Seattle). I hadn't thought of anything other than London until you suggested it, xorial.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blade Adept Arcanist 6/Technomancer with a Null Blade. The requirements to construct one aren't too bad, looks reasonably powerful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rachel Carter wrote:
Would you start with a daemon and customize it, or a character and daemon-ize it, or just make something new, basing it on abilities simillar to the demon lords in bestiary 4 and the great old ones pointed out already?

You could go either way. Find a demon of the CR you're look for to use as a starting point. You could give him an ability to call opponents the party has killed to fight for him. Or start the encounter with a simulacrum (per the spell) of each PC, with an undead template added.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think from a mechanical point of view, it makes combat easier for melee characters (a lot of important combat effects only work within one move action for a medium humanoid). And I think from a grid or playset point of view, it makes mapping a grid more manageable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The PCs should have Freedom of Movement cast to avoid difficult terrain, and will need a lot of mobility. Gargantuan and Colossal creatures usually have a lot of movement, and sometimes can fly or burrow. Ranged attacks are ideal, since the PCs can stay out of melee range (reach melee range) and don't have to keep up with a moving kaiju or dragon. Melee with a colossal creature is dangerous, since they typically have powerful melee attacks and options that include grappling and dealing damage every round. Grappling a colossal creature is a no-win scenario for a PC.

There are threads on PCs optimized to fight the Tarrasque, they might advice on fighting a colossal opponent. There are a couple guides to combat tactics (action economy and dealing and preventing damage) that have a little bit of advice on optimizing movement and making use of ranged attacks. Last time I ran a colossal red dragon encounter (in 3.5) I had to nerf the encounter to prevent a TPK. I had the dragon grab the melee PC, teleport to a great height, and drop the PC (who lacked flying). The players gen'd level 21 characters (using Epic rules) and hadn't worked out their tactics. In the end, I had the dragon polymorph to a medium-sized humanoid and he got stuck inside a prismatic sphere cast by a PC. They remaining PCs took advantage of the limited space and reduced the dragon to less than half hit points, at which point the dragon fled (surviving passing the the sphere, with lots of hit points and SR and solid saves).

My experience is an encounter with a colossal creature requires a lot of prep by the GM, if the PCs have great tactics the GM needs to be prepared to make it a challenge and if the PCs have terrible tactics or roll poorly for saves the GM needs to scale it back a bit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ben Gum wrote:
I'd like to see a bard archetype focusing on fire performances. Twirling around flaming chains, breathing fire, all the things an entertainer with a pyromaniac bent would just love to have.

Great idea! Along those lines, elemental cleric archetypes would be cool. Taking earth, fire, air, and water domains a step further might be fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll second sorcerer or witch. Sorcerer is easy to get used to the mechanics of, but a little challenging for the first few levels (limited spell selection). Maybe human sorcerer (+2 cha) with point blank shot and either spell focus- evocation or improved initiative at level one, then spell focus-enchantment at level three? The zero level spell acid splash would benefit from point blank shot, as would acid arrow when he gets second level spells.

If its 20 pt buy, I would recommend
Str 10
Dex 14
Con 14
Int 10
Wis 10
Cha 18 (including +2 racial bonus)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's a skill-based encounter:

Summary: Rogue/Bard/Skill character must disarm device while party fights off opponents

CR of the encounter: Variable

Typ of encounter: Skill challenge and combat

Background: A fairly challenging encounter that lets all characters shine- the skill character must disable the device, the group needs teamwork, combat characters have lots of combat, bards/evangelists can buff the party, summoning-focused characters can help out a lot, and creative spellcasting is a necessity.

Encounter: This works best in a dungeon. A device must be disarmed, requiring two or three disable device checks. You can tie knowledge checks to each, for example a knowledge-arcana for the first, knowledge-religions for the second, and knowledge-history or local for the third. Successfully making the knowledge check lowers the disable device DC for that check by 5. The character has 8 rounds to disable to device (you can retry a failed check at +1 DC). The party is fighting off waves of opponents- APL -1 on round 1, APL +0 on round 3, APL +1 on round 5, and APL+2 on round 7. The party must keep the opponents from interrupting the character. If the character fails to disable the device, the dungeon begins flooding.

Comment: I've run variations of this. It's inspired by my favorite encounters in Cyberpunk, where a hacker or slicer has to hack into a system while the rest of the team keeps opponents busy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:


I think nearly everyone likes everyone to some extent, we're all just very opinionated on here.

We have a lot more in common than we have disagreements (by we I mean everyone on the boards).

I'll add Azixirad, he started the thread.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll second everyone mentioned, and add a few names:

Steve Geddes Kirth Gerson (sp?)
Sean K. Reynolds (even though he's been mentioned)
Rynjian (also mentioned)
Ravingdork (also mentioned, I'm a big fan of his character emporium)
James Jacobs
Liz Courts (she not only babysits us to keep flamewars from happening, she also reviews third-party submissions to sell on Paizo.com)
weirdo

I'm sure I'm missing a few names that should be added.

edit: Adding
ChainSawSam
Brom the Obnoxiously Awesome
LazarX
Tomos
lemeres

2nd edit: Adding
Mordo the Spaz (Forum Troll)
and any other avatars I suspect are used by Paizo devs

3rd edit: Adding
Aelryinth- he's been mentioned before, but I think I spelled it correctly (possibly the first to do so)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Emmanuel Nouvellon-Pugh wrote:
1e feels more campy in that death is often an achievement depending on how you die. Bit by werewolf, curse trap, snake poison, needle trap, huge demon, pitfall, large orc, slime, mold, and countless spells. 1e is rock paper scissors, 3.5 is Chinese checkers in that one is calculated response and the other is trial and error.

I think those of us who remember 1E fondly are viewing it through the lens of nostalgia. Those were weekends of gaming in junior high and high school, before people had internet in every home. And everything felt like an achievement in 1E, surviving every random encounter felt like a huge accomplishment. Finding a longsword +1/+3 vs. undead felt like finding the most powerful magic item ever. Even learning a new spell as a magic-user or disabling a trap as thief was a big deal. And succeeding at any save vs. death roll (save vs. poison or save vs. wands, staves, and rods for example) was a big deal.

3E and PF improved the mechanics by orders of magnitude. But if you ever faced nilbogs in combat and survived (probably by running away), it was something you might talk about for years.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Part of my thinking is that a 40 pt buy barbarian not optimized for combat can be fun to play, from a roleplaying perspective. From what I've seen of PFS, a decent-sized part of the population of players are pretty serious about optimizing. An optimized 20 pt buy half-orc barbarian will be more powerful in combat than a non-optimized 40 pt buy gnome barbarian, but the 40 pt buy helps the non-optimized PC survive and do well in combat. Of course, a 40 pt buy optimized barbarian (maybe evening with Int and Cha of 7) will be much more powerful in combat than a non-optimized 40 pt buy barbarian. But the friends I play with tend to like thematic non-optimized characters.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Keep Copies of the players' Character Sheets

This gives you the option of running an encounter during your prep time to see how it might go, and will help keep track of their abilities. If a player has a lot of ranks in a skill they don't use very often (a craft, knowledge, or perform skill for example) you can work that into the story.

Make Them Important Members of Organization

They should be important members of class and profession related organizations. Other high ranking members of their church, wizards guild, rogues guild, or knightly organization should ask them for advice and occasionally ask them to deal with a major threat or issue. Nobles who hired them at low levels might ask them to be a best man or bridesmaid at a wedding, and they might be asked to be diplomatic envoys by heads of state. Villainous organizations will know of them and might ask them to negotiate a ceasefire with another villainous organization.

Remember what the Players Enjoy doing

This has been mentioned before, but players have encounters and actions they particularly enjoy. A player playing a rogue might love sneaking into an enemy headquarters to gather information and wreak havoc (possibly as simple as altering outfits with itching or sneezing powder before the villain's public appearance). A player playing an arcane spellcaster might enjoy creative uses of a lower level spell. A player playing a martial character might love solo combat or holding off large groups of enemies. A player playing a divine spellcaster might want to create a church or druid's grove in a new city.

Be Willing to use material from other Genres

One encounter I enjoy in Shadowrun and Cyberpunk is combat where a hacker has to hack a system while the rest of the team holds off a group of corporate security or mercenaries (an equivalent could be the rogue or skill character has to disarm a magical device to prevent a portal to the Abyss from opening). Call of Cthulhu style investigations are difficult (at least for me) to run well in D&D/PF but I've run CoC one-shots converted to d20 before.

Be Familiar with the players' favorite authors and tv shows

This can be a great source of inspiration. If one or more players are huge GRRM or RA Salvatore fans, you can run the occasional adventure modeled after works by those authors. If a player really loves Dr. Who or Downton Abbey, an occasional adventure inspired by a storyline from an episode might work well. Videogames can also provide story inspiration, if a player really likes Skyrim or Icewind Dale 2 those have storylines that can serve as inspiration.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You could make a powerful demon responsible. There is an artifact with limits divine power, making turning/commanding undead much more difficult (treat undead as +8 HD). The souls of living are trapped in the artifact when they die. The PCs must find a way to release the souls before they can try to destroy the artifact.

If you go this route, you could use a skinwalker type monster for agents of the demon lord. Make a greater skinwalker variant who can replace and mimic monsters, so the demon lord will have agents within churches and knightly orders, as well as villainous organizations and among organized monsters.

The demon lord gains followers, returning loved ones to life in exchange for loyalty. Some pockets of the living organize to fight against the demon lord, but some work for the demon lord.

So it would start out like The Walking Dead, and the agents of the demon lord would get increasingly more powerful and dangerous as the story goes on.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

There was a thread about recapturing the essence of AD&D not too long ago, where we waxed nostalgic for the good points of AD&D. The lack of character optimization lent itself to a focus on roleplaying- with no feats and few class features you started with a name and a few personality traits to define your character. Teamwork was a necessity, since your first level party might end up fighting an umber hulk from a random encounter table. The months or years between leveling up also lent itself to roleplaying.

The main thing us older gamers are nostalgic for is being 14 and playing AD&D with friends. Back then, playing AD&D (or Palladium or Warhammer Fantasy) was the highlight of the week. 2E had a lot of flaws- 3E improved in 2E in almost every way and PF improved on 3E almost as much as 3E improved in 2E. Some of the big issues are the skill system (non-weapon proficiencies), saving throws, no WBL, no CR system, few class features, etc. 2E had great settings (Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Ravenloft, Planescape) but it hurt sales because players would only play one setting and not buy anything set in other settings.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's my attempt at Harpoon:

Dual-Talented Human Inquisitor 12/Hierophant (Holy Warrior) 2
HD 12d8+ 60
Domain- Destruction

Str 22 (18+2 racial+2 belt of perfection)
Dex 18
Con 20
Int 12
Wis 24 (18+2 racial+4 for levels)
Cha 10

BAB +9 CMB +14 CMD 18

Initiative +17 (+4 dex,+4 imp. init., +2 amazing initiative +7 wis), AC 20 (+6 armor +4 dex)

Feats- Point Blank Shot, Ex. Weapon Prof.-Harpoon, Precise Shot, Improved Initiative, Deadly Aim, Weapon Focus- Harpoon
Teamwork Feats- Coordinated Defense, Coordinated Maneuvers, Lookout, Outflank
Mythic Feat- Extra Mythic Power
Mythic Powers- Heathen Slayer, Eldritch Breach

Cr 13, and Sabretooth is also approximately CR 13

Combat Gear: Efficient Quiver, 6 masterwork harpoons, Belt of Physical Perfection +2, Marauder Armor (equivalent of elven chain +2 and grants +2 to saving throws)

I took a few liberties with Harpoon, who is my favorite Marauder. I'm Yupik Inuit (Eskimo) from Alaska, Harpoon is one of the few Inuit characters in comics (I believe he is Inuit from Canada, Green Lantern's sidekick is another Inuit in comics). Chris Claremont's writing of Alaska Natives and Native Americans was really good in my opinion, he wrote Native characters as interesting characters who happen to be Native (Shaman from Alpha Flight didn't have much personality or backstory and is an example of a poorly written character, being Native was his personality and backstory). Something that works particularly well, and may have been an accident, is Harpoon tries to avoid getting killed. It was eventually revealed that Mr. Sinister can clone the Marauders so they never stay dead, but a few try to avoid getting killed (and some do not try to avoid getting killed). Inuit traditionally believed in reincarnation if you are in harmony with your community, the animal world, and the spirit world. Harpoon would be reluctant to be reincarnated (even as himself) given that he kills lots of people for Mr. Sinister.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My experience with homebrewing elements of Golarion is that it's easy to use anything from Golarion. PFS adventures tend to be very setting specific, but modules and APs can work in a homebrew. And Bellona wrote up how to use APs in Forgotten Realms.

I only own a few Inner Sea setting books, but those can be ported over to a new work as well. Golarion with the campaign guides is kind of like a 1/2/3E Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk in that there is a lot of stuff, some of it really cool and some of it stuff you might leave out. Forgotten Realms starts with three times as many gods and three times as much setting as a setting needs, so you have a lot to choose from and leave a lot out. Bellona's tour of FR hits most everything I usually use, except I usually start on the Sword Coast before exploring, and will include the Dales and Kara Tur in a campaign. Greyhawk and Golarion start out with a reasonable number of gods and a reasonable amount of setting, and slowly add on to get to a point where you choose what to include and what to leave out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One things the new ACG classes might help with is the gap in system mastery with some existing classes. An optimized fighter, druid, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and really every class is more effective by at least an order of magnitude than a non-optimized version of the same class.

My old gaming group playtested several WotC and White Wolf products, and the group included players with a lot of system mastery and players with little or no system mastery. Two fighters can have a huge disparity in effectiveness (ability to hit, deal damage, AC, and saves) even at first level and the gap increases at each level. The disparity between an optimized druid, sorcerer, or wizard and a non-optimized fighter, rogue, or bard is even more pronounced.

We had some discussion in this thread of how the swashbuckler lets new players play a swashbuckler concept without having to learn four books. There will be difference between an optimized swashbuckler and non-optimized, but I think the learning curve to make the new classes effective might be a little less steep. From what I've seen, the new classes will be easy to play and (subjectively) have fun playing and be effective with (subjectively again) without having a (again subjective) high degree of system mastery. Playing a controller wizard or summon specialist cleric takes a lot of knowledge of builds and tactics. The arcanist and shaman might be able to fill similar roles without the same level of knowledge.

Which could overshadow parent classes, but the parent classes will probably still be played. A wizard with a lot of spells in their spellbook can specialize for a lot of situations (trip to an elemental plane, for example) and can have a few mainstay or signature spells they rely on mostly (dazing magic missile for example).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm creating a Solo Dungeon on google docs for solo Pathfinder play. Please feel free to use and contribute:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/174sUR4IwotNE_ZvsI1ZU4N9-IKKYGX0tI_p8LB2 fda0/pub


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There was a thread a few weeks ago asking for advice on making an epic Great Wyrm Red Dragon encounter. I assume a great wyrm red dragon will have a lot of defenses to use up supplies of PCs before they reach the dragon, and might (in one of my campaigns definitely) have a network of spies, and agents who hire adventurers. The PCs in question may have procured items and artifacts for the dragon through an intermediary, the dragon probably knows their strengths and weaknesses. If I were running the encounter, the dragon would have a lernean cryohydra or similar encounter two or three encounters before the dragon's lair, to use up protection from element supplies (and maybe catch the PCs off guard if they only have protection from fire). One or two encounters before the lair are a pair of advanced iron golems, the fight will make a lot of noise and give the dragon time to cast buff spells.

Once in the lair, the dragon has levers on the ceiling, disguised as stalactites:

Lever 1: pours steak sauce on PCs
Lever 2: Activates anti-magic field starting at height ten feet above floor level
The dragon then uses his/her breath weapon to melt piles of gold at a higher level, turning them into molten gold (combo lava/quicksand rules)
Lever 3: Pours molten gold into anti-magic field area where some or all PCs are
Lever 4: Opens trap door to 40'x40'x80' deep pit, and gravity drops molten gold into pit
Lever 5: Pours water into pit (which has an anti-magic field, of course)
Lever 6: Release the kraken

With the network of spies, the dragon will have countermeasures prepared for PCs who can fly

There are brilliant anti-dragon builds here, but a great wyrm red dragon will know his/her weaknesses and will know the strengths and weaknesses of the PCs.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's been commented before in this thread, but the months (or more) of game sessions between leveling up influenced playing styles. I enjoy leveling up more frequently, but remember playing characters more than leveling up. As Touc pointed out, remembering creativity is fun. I never tell stories of "that one time I rolled a natural twenty and one-shotted the BBEG." I have a couple stories of GMing and players being really creative, but no one reminisces about a particular dice roll. So in some cases that more frequent level advances lends itself to focusing on the build and the next level (and the feat and/or class abilities to be gained). The feats at odd levels and more frequent class abilities are a lot of fun, but in 1E most levels you only got a few hit points, maybe better THAC0 and a better save or two (save vs. rods, staves, wands if lucky), and most importantly a new title based on your class level.

A lot of AD&D elements carried over with my old group. We gamed together for about 17 years, starting in 2E in 1996. As we got older and guys got married and had families we went from gaming Monday nights and going out a few nights a week to only hanging out on Monday games. When I first started GMing regularly I made more than my share of mistakes, but the group could make inexperienced GMing fun for everyone. I didn't become aware of the fairly common playstyle differences between old-school gamers and new-school gamers until I joined a PFS night event at a gaming store. It was a mix of a few old-school gamers and a lot of newer gamers. Everyone had fun, but a guy who had never played an RPG joined and the PFS GM gave him a half-hour tutorial on character builds and tactics, without mentioning roleplaying. It looks like the focus on builds and tactics and DPR and survivability and deemphasis on roleplaying may be relatively common in newer gamers.

I think one of the things several old school gamers (myself included)think of as part of the essence of AD&D is the social aspect, and having fun with friends. PFS is good for sales, and I believe the success of PF helps game stores make a profit and lets them carry other RPG products, but there is less of a 'social, hanging out with friends' aspect. It's more like playing an MMO at a table with casual aquaintances.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A lot of the things we're complaining about have been around a long time- powergamers, players who min/max equipment and stats, players who don't roleplay in a way we consider ideal. I think part of it is the optimizing rollplayers post builds, and that has a lot of influence on players who grew up with console RPGs and MMOs. I tend to remember an idealized version of the best of years of gaming. Of course a few PFS experiences and what I see posted about modern PF experiences doesn't compare.

But this thread is going strong approaching 900 posts, I'm glad to see others remember AD&D like I do and love what I love about AD&D. The sparcity of rules could be a lot of fun (it could also be a problems, but I have fond memories of rules made on the fly that worked well). In a column or interview Monte Cook answered a question about the gaps in rules in AD&D, he answered "roll a d6, that's a good mechanic when the rulebook doesn't spell out what to do." Even when I run 3E or PF, if I don't know a rule off the top of my head I'll suggest a mechanic and if the group says it sounds reasonable (or at least reasonable enough to avoid stopping the game to look up a rule) we'll go with it, and look up the rule later.

I'm enjoying the discussion of roleplaying interactions, rather than rollplaying interactions. Modules that include diplomacy and intimidate DCs to accomplish things in encounters with NPCs help when it comes to running a universal experience, but there's a lot less backstory on NPCs and the world included in the modules. Temple of Elemental Evil, Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, and Expidition to Castle Ravenloft come to mind as having great dynamics between NPCs and a sense of a world that exists apart from PCs, towns that are places with lives of their own rather than places with an inn and a magic shop.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I've voiced my opinion that lot of what has been lost from AD&D is due to improvements in PF mechanics and design and a younger generation who have grown up with console RPGs and MMOs. WBL makes the game more consistent and more player friendly, but takes the 'sense of magic and wonder' out of magic items. In 1E/2E I played characters who reached 8th level before getting a magic item. The feat and class ability choices allow a lot of character optimization, but loses the sense of a PC being defined by personality and what they do. Encounter design lends itself to a consistent experience, but loses some the creativity needed to be APL +4 random encounters and the sense of relief at surviving each encounter. The online build and strategy guides lead to routine encounters some of the time. And the ability to pick what spells your magic-user learns inhibits creativity and lends itself to fighters and rogues becoming almost superfluous at medium and high levels.

The well-defined set of rules is a good thing most of the time, but inhibits the loose and fluid play AAG mentioned earlier. The first time I played PF was at a PFS night at a gaming store. The party got wiped out almost entirely by a basilisk (the GM didn't really adjust for 1st level PCs instead of the recommended 4-5th level party). My sorcerer was behind a table for cover and to avoid the gaze, and there war bars between my PC and the basilisk. I needed to kill the basilisk to get blood to turn the party back from statues. My only spell left was unlimited 0-level acid splash. I explained how I could fire blind without risking the gaze attack, and explained statistically how long it would take to kill the basilisk. The GM wouldn't allow it because the rules never spell out how to average attack rolls and miss chance. I said I could fire acid splash at the ceiling above the basilisk until it collapsed and killed the basilisk. The GM said there was no rule for that and it wouldn't work. The GM didn't allow for creative solutions to work or anything not spelled out in the rules, and the result was TPK. In AD&D the GM and players quickly learn the value of creativity, in this case a new player quit PF after the TPK.

One the other hand, three of the first times I DMed AD&D were TPKs. I ran adventures from the 1E Dragonlance module World of Krynn. A wyvern killed a 9th level party due to failed saves, and in the Dargaard Keep adventure the group ran into a lich/20th level magic user in the first encounter once and into Lord Soth's court first (Soth, Death Knights, and banshees) first after sneaking into the keep.

I think there's a middle ground of keeping the benefits of WBL and player optimization, but it takes work by the GM and players. I've seen new PFS players sat down for an hour long explanation of character optimization and tactics before generating a character. Optimization and tactics are good things, but I think the sense of wonder and the creativity inspired by AD&D are lost.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

PF is fairly combat intensive, which requires a lot of rules. The joke is the 3E was a miniature based tactical combat game, roleplaying optional. I think PF has cleaned up the rules a lot, but combat with melee, ranged attacks, spells, and movement lends itself to a lot of rules. Paizo makes money of of modules (which I think is an improvement over releasing a new edition every five years to make everyone buy the books again). The rules-heavy system supports PFS adventures sales and AP sales. The main books are available free online, to Paizo's credit.

There are benefits to a rules-heavy system in creating a more universal experience. Those of us who have been playing since 1E/2E probably all can remember GMs who did a poor job, or playing in a friend's game and seeing house rules that ruin the game. PF's rules-heavy mechanics require few if any houserules, so every PFS game provides a generally fun and universal experience.

One of the downsides is a universal set of mechanics with a lot of options for player optimization lends itself to less creativity in character development, and to a certain extent in roleplaying. The younger generation grew up playing console rpgs and WoW, they are familiar with optimizing character builds. The encounter and adventure design makes it so every encounter is winnable, which is good for sales and generally good for player enjoyment of the game. But it lends itself to a playing style that focuses on optimal use of resources (spells, class abilities, etc). Earlier in the thread I shared creative uses of Create Water, uses that are reminiscent of AD&D flexibility and creativity. The nice thing about PF is players never have to think of ways to use a zero level spell to beat a CR 6 or CR 10 encounter. But it's also a downside, if you can count on four encounters per day you can budget spells and resources accordingly. There is some creativity lost if you never run into an umber hulk at low levels because the random encounter table is a little harsh, you never have to make a habit of running away if an encounter looks too tough or getting really creative with the spells and class abilities the party has left.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe we can petition Paizo to make their next Dragon's Demand style mega-module something to appeal to the old-school 1E/2E players and introduce the younger generation to some of what we've discussed nostalgically. These might include:

1. Rolling for character creation, or at least somewhat random character creation. Something I've played with is having players roll 4d6 drop the lowest, arrange as desired, and if one player rolls particularly well that set of rolls becomes the array for everyone. Then each player replaces on stat with 15+1d3. This captures some of the 1E/2E character creation, where you might have one really good attribute that is not a prime attribute.

2. Greater range of encounters. My observation is that modern encounter design keeps EL within +3/-3 of APL. If that range is increased to +/-5 or 6 that changes how PCs approach encounters. It encourages conserving resources, and makes an easy encounter something of a relief. This might help the fighter shine, the fighter doesn't have many limitations on using abilities or feats a certain number of times per day.

3. Less optimization and customization for the first few levels. I'm a big fan of PF customization and optimization, it makes the game generally more fun and a lot more player friendly for the first few levels. But limiting spells known and spell selection for the first 3 levels forces players to be creative for a few levels, especially with use of spells.

I'm sure there are more (and probably better suggestions) for recapturing the feel of AD&D. I prefer PF to AD&D by a lot, but there were a lot of fun things about AD&D (I wouldn't go back to spheres of influences for cleric spells, rolling for spells known at 1st level, or not learning spells as a magic-user when leveling up).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've enjoyed this thread as well. I'm a big fan of PF, and Pathfinder is the flagship RPG at most gamestores, at least that's my observation. PF is a great system IMO, and it helps keep the industry going and makes it easier for White Wolf and Pagan Publishing and other publishers to succeed with games that are also great systems.

My old gaming group in Seattle started as a playtest group for a friend who did freelance work for WotC and White Wolf and a few small publishers. One change I've seen from 1E/2E to 3E/PF is the difference in player system mastery on combat effectiveness. 1E/2E had relatively soft rules and rewarded creativity without punishing lack of system mastery. 3E/PF rewards system mastery and rewards creativity within the bounds of system mastery. Some of the players in the group had a high level of system mastery with any system (one friend in the group could break a game within five minutes of picking up the rulebook, usually by taking advantage of the balance issues most systems have with grappling). One player had zero system mastery in any system (he doesn't read rulebooks) but is pretty creative. A 3E adventures I ran featured a wasp swarm to occupy the PCs while a 'level boss' type druid summoned monsters and buffed them. The creative player with no system mastery said 'I cast Create Water' on the swarm. In 1E/2E that would be easy to adjudicate in the PC's favor. 3E/PF lends itself to more strict rules interpretation, probably with guidelines on a spell bypassing an encounter based on the spell level. I went with an AD&D approach and said the 20 gallons of water prevent the wasp swarm from flying, bypassing the wasp swarm.

The more detailed and expansive rules help create a more universal experience, but don't reward creativity as much. Another 3E create water example, a friend was GMing and created a challenging encounter. There was a 40' deep pit, with a 1' wide beam across. There was a 5'x5' platform with a half-orc fighter specializing in trip attacks on the platform. The party was mostly out of spells and low on hps, so I cast Create Water just above the half-orc fighter. The GM applauded my creativity and the fighter failed a reflex save, falling into the pit (we still lost a PC to a failed balance check going across the pit).

So I have nostalgia for the old days. I spent a summer in junior high where the highlights of the summer were playing AD&D. We would help the GM with yardwork his folks made him do for favorable DMing (we ran across more potions of healing and the magic-user was more likely to find scrolls with useful spells). But PF has made a lot of improvements, some of the at a cost. Groups can houserule like in the AD&D days to create an old-school experience, and we can sit on rocking chairs and tell the young whippersnappers not to play on the lawn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another thought on 1/2E vs. 3E/PF- the options for character optimization at 1st make the game a lot friendlier to low level characters but changes the experience. I'm a fan of the options and optimization a 1st level PC has, but it's a lot different from 1E days. 1st level PCs rolled for hit points, so you might start with 1 hp. Magic-users (wizards nowadays) rolled for what spells they started with instead of choosing. The fighter carried the party for a few levels typically, while the magic user found creative ways to use Tenser's Floating Disc (mage's floating disc, typically used to carry flammable items/oil into a group of enemies). The lack of optimization and sometimes lack of effectiveness for a few levels led to a lot of roleplaying. A thief (rogue nowadays) with low hit points became an archer out of necessity, not wanting to risk being near the front line. Rangers and paladins had attribute requirements, my groups often relished a chance to play a class with tougher attribute reqs and planned out ranger or paladin names, personalities, and taglines for months or years before getting a chance to play one.

The improved options for optimization and customization available in PF lends itself to creating characters with a minimum to-hit bonus, DPR, AC, saves, and spell DCs in mind at first level. Point buy is cool, but I've seen a lot of PFS characters with a Cha of 7 (or 5 if a dwarf or half-orc) so they can have higher combat stats. The randomness of 1E/2E attributes sometimes lent itself to roleplaying, a cleric with an exceptionally high Dex or Cha or a thief with a Wis of 16 could be fun to roleplay.

I'm a big fan of 3E/PF and the options it provides, but RPGs and RPG players have changed since 25 years ago.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll second the influence of MMOs has changed RPGs and RPG players. 1E and 2E didn't have strict rules on movement and attack actions, so roleplaying was more emphasized. Starting with 3E action economy is a major component of d20 games. MMOs contribute to this, younger players learn a lot of strategy and tactics playing online RPG-type games.

Another change, probably partly MMO influenced, is encounter and adventure design. I picked up Rappan Athuk for PF not too long ago, and it's classic 1E D&D brutal. Some encounters are way beyond the party's ability to handle. I think the brutal random encounter tables and occasional unwinnable encounter contributed to the roleplaying atmosphere of AD&D. If you know that every time you roll initiative you should be able to beat the encounter you approach the game differently. It's important that the GM and PCs are on the same page on this, if the GM starts throwing unwinnable encounters at PCs to railroad them into a course of action that's bad GMing. But if there's an understanding that a random encounter table might produce an EL +7 encounter or that some parts of a dungeon have unbeatable monsters that tends to make players have fun roleplaying rather than focus on having fun beating APL +3 encounters in a certain number of rounds.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

To make a challenging high level dragon encounter, set up its lair to maximum effect (williamoak has great suggestions for mythic ranks already). You can use the classic massive inactive volcano lair, with a high alcove visible only from 200' above ground. The hidden alcove has a magic device that can heal the dragon and scrolls of buff spells. Stalactites-looking levers adorn the upper reaches of the lair, activating them triggers nasty traps. Have a loud encounter two encounters before facing the dragon, so the dragon has time to cast buff spells. So the encounter starts with a buffed mythic old wyrm red dragon. When the dragon drops below 40% hit points, it retreats to the alcove to heal. Then it casts simulacrum from a scroll, sending the simulacrum to soften up the party. The dragon casts more buff spells while the party fights the simulacrum.

If you want to be mean, give the dragon an intelligence/spy network. The dragon hires the party through intermediaries to retrieve an artifact the dragon covets. The intermediary then hires the party to slay the dragon with said artifact, bringing the artifact to the dragon.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My suggestions for changes to the fighter are:

4 skill points/level
Choose 2 skills not the list to add to the list of class skills (customizable, each fighter chooses two more class skills)
Ignore attribute prereqs for feats
More fighter only feats

The lack of out of combat utility gets more pronounced at medium and higher levels. Pathfinder made huge improvements to class balance over 3E, the fighter does okay in combat (in 3E the fighter fell behind all the other classes in combat around 6th level and had no out-of-combat utility). None of the feat chains compare (imho) to some of the barbarian's or ranger's class features- rage powers and the favored enemy/favored terrain combo are easy to make cool. It takes a lot of planning to make a fighter effective at high levels, it's relatively easy to make a barbarian, gunslinger, paladin, or ranger effective at high levels.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I second all the monsters mentioned, but would like to add the Umber Hulk. The first time I played AD&D the DM rolled on the wrong encounter table and we had a tpk after running into an umber hulk. That makes them scary to me after all these years.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Best wishes in the move and in Indiana, Sean and Jodi (I've only met Jodi in passing but send my best wishes). I'd make a list of favorite d20 products Sean has worked on, but it would be a long list. All of his Forgotten Realms work, his 3E website (his write-ups on the Greyhawk gods were great, like all his works on DnD/PF deities), all his Paizo work, his non-Paizo work, and some of the minis on his etsy store. I guess it's a short list.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I took a few liberties, trying to balance what makes an effective character against staying true to the novels. I don't remember Raistlin summoning any creatures, but I read the War of the Lance and Time of the Twins novels over twenty years ago.

It's tough to convert novels into game mechanics. Sometimes major characters don't stat up well, Caramon is a good example. His 18/53 Str was exceptional and much higher than most of the NPCs in the hardcover 1E book. Ariakas was described as being strong enough to throw a spear throw a horse, but I think he had a Str of 14. Alignment is particularly difficult, sometimes characters make poor decisions that advance the story but their alignment would translate to lawful stupid (Ned Stark, poster boy for lawful stupid alignment) or chaotic (stupid) evil (more stupidity to follow), like many villains from novels.

I've run a few Dragonlance one-shots over the years set just after the War of the Lance. I rewrite some of what happens just after the war, and call it 'A Moment in Time.' The Dragonarmies are still around and running a few nations. My modifications include mostly intact spy networks operated by each Dragonarmy and Ariakas separately. The Blue Dragonarmy teams up with the minotaurs and is building an empire through economics, controlling a significant part of the shipping trade. They move in and help rebuild war-torn areas, and incorporate them into their empire after rebuilding them (think Allies post-WWII). The Red Dragonarmy still seeks to conquer nations by force, and lieutenants and generals from other Dragonarmies will join them, so the Red Dragonarmy is a mini-version of Takhisis's forces. Palanthus is capitalizing on its neutrality, having been untouched by the War (partly because it is favored by the Gods of Neutrality). The noble families of Palanthus make money off of the rebuilding of other nations (think Haliburton in our continuing wars in the Middle East). Meanwhile, some Palanthus nobles created mercenary companies, hiring young men from across the continent (so they got paid as mercenaries rather than being conscripted). Now that the War of the Lance is over, Palanthus profits from continuing warfare, and a lot of able-bodied men are working as mercenaries rather than rebuilding their farms and cities. This creates opportunities for women (think WWII, when many women entered the workforce while men were overseas fighting). So Dragonarmies and individual opportunities are taking advantage of the ongoing conflicts after the war, and looking for artifacts and conquering nearby towns and cities and creating campaign material. I took the adventures in the World of Krynn 1E module and expanded them into a mini-campaign.

Dedicated Voter Season 7, Dedicated Voter Season 8, Star Voter Season 9

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Since this is the praise thread, I'd like to say how cool Paizo is for doing a great RPG Superstar every year. A lot of really cool items that look like they're submitted by younger players (younger age-wise and gaming years wise, I've been gaming about 25 years). A lot of players are getting experience writing up items, and getting great experience thinking about how a specific item would work in a specific encounter. A fair number of items are pretty situational (at least before the cull), which requires a kind of creativity that should be encouraged. A lot of items that didn't make the cull were probably submitted by players who will write up better items next year, and probably write better material for their games after this experience. Great job Paizo!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Jaelithe I'm focusing on North American, I'm not familiar enough with Meso- and South- American indigenous cultures and mythologies.

@MagusJanus I'm using current tellings of what are considered traditional stories as the basis for mythology. The recorded (audio and written recordings) stories are most reliable going back to early colonial contact, with audio recordings more recent. The culture basis is historical knowledge of cultures, both early after colonization of North America and what is known about pre-colonial history. My MA thesis focused on Native American economic development and how traditional cultural values influence such development, so I have a reasonably strong background in culture and mythology.

@Fizzygoo Thanks! I'm not focusing on an exclusively pre-colonial setting, I'm thinking more along the lines of using Native-inspired cultures and peoples as part of a setting. Similar to the Dolthraki in a Song of Ice and Fire (even though they're more Mongol than North American) or the Plains people of Dragonlance. I'm gearing it towards Pathfinder/d20 as the base system. I'll take a stab (pun intended) at advice on melee balance for Pre-Colombian settings. I'm part of the school of thought that believes d20 combat balance is good as is, writing up combat mechanics balance is tricky territory- I'll write suggestions for keeping combat balance working rather than starting from the perspective that balance needs to be fixed overall.

@Jeff Erwin There have been some really good small press RPGs with Native American cultures, I'd have to look up one in particular that was really good. I'm not familiar with Northern Crown but I'll check it out when I get the chance. I really like Maztlan, and that's a large part of my inspiration. Faerun had a lot of great material from a lot of settings and genres, and I'm a big fan of having a lot of different genres/settings available in a campaign world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm working on some scalable encounters and scenarios and would like feedback. They're designed to use skills and combat, with skill checks modifying combat to a certain extent. Here they are:

Encounter: The Room

The PCs are racing against a group of NPCs to retrieve a magic gem. There is a 30' x 30' room with two locked doors opposite each other. In the middle of the room is a 10' x 10' raised platform with magical effects affecting those standing on it. There is a pedestal with the magic gem in the middle.

Opening the door requires five successful disable device checks, with an encounter specific modifier. At first level it is a DC 10 check, with an extra success for each 5 points the DC is beaten by. And a successful diplomacy, intimidate, or bluff check (assumed to have taken place before the encounter) provides info that equals one success (DC 18 for first level).

The raised platform provides +1 attack, AC, and saves and allows a reroll of a failed save for everyone standing on it. This gives a significant advantage to the group who gets into the room first.

Removing the magic gem from the pedestal requires five successful checks from disable device or any knowledge check (there is a riddle involving elements that can be deciphered with a successful knowledge check, DC 15 at level one). Removing the magic gem heals all the party members of the character who removes it.

The setup is the opposing group gets past their door on round three.

Scenario: Jailbreak

The youngest son of a major noble family is in jail overnight. He frequently drinks too much and has a separate, nicely furnished jail cell set aside for him. The PCs have learned his signet ring (inherited from a relative who favored the young noble despite his place in the line of succession) holds a clue to finding a major artifact. They have also learned an assassin (or group of assassins) will attempt to kill the noble and take the signet ring.

The PCs have information that some of the local authorities have been bought off by the assassin(s). They must get into the jail, protect the noble, and convince the noble to help them find the artifact.

This one has a lot of customization/flexibility (meaning a lot of details haven't been written for it yet). The PCs could let part or all of the group get arrested. They could attempt to sneak into the jail. They could impersonate another member of the noble family to be allowed to visit the endangered noble. Weapons and consumables will be confiscated, but a PC with teleport or dimension door or a similar ability could bring weapons to jailed PCs. The PCs will need to gather information with social skills and sense motive checks to figure out which members of the constabulary are working for the assassin(s). Once the assassin(s) strike, planning will affect how much mobility and preparation they have available.

The idea is scalable (scaleable?) encounters which require a balance of PC strengths. They could be helpful for playtesting, since both can be run with different mixes of characters. And the opponents can be changed to allow for running with the same characters but a slightly different challenge (fighting a rogue, sorcerer and a witch makes for a different encounter than fighting a group composed of an urban ranger, gunslinger, and druid).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm repeating some things that have said (and adding my support to anything I'm repeating):

1) Playtesting shows what happens when a large number of gamers play the classes. An optimized specialist wizard will be more powerful than a lot of sorcerer builds, but a sorcerer is fairly easy to play and is still effective most or all of the time. The swashbuckler's saves are an issue on paper, but it might work differently in gameplay- a swashbuckler might be so useful at high levels the casters might always cast save-boosting buffs, or it could be a swashbuckler usually ends up multiclassing to boost saves, or the saves could be worse than they look on paper.

2) The Paizo developers are very good at theorycrafting, and don't have enough time to playtest each class from levels 1-20 before the summer. A fair number of theorycrafters will notice things Paizo devs won't and those theorycrafters will post without encouragement. And playtesters will catch things Paizo devs won't (sometimes a new player will stumble on a combo an experienced player won't think of, and it might be a powerful combo or a really weak combo).

3) People who design and write rpgs can easily miss something they wrote that needs to be fixed. In the first printed edition of Godlike, a character with a strength of one always drowns in water. You need two dice to attempt a swim roll. The designers intended for a minimum of two dice for any check, but didn't include that in the rules. So designers testing the system used the minimum of two dice for a check without including that in the book.

4) Extensive open playtesting will show how a lot of class combinations work. I'm guessing ACG will have upgrades for rogue and monk (and new options for all the classes), but it may be that a combo of skald, bard, rogue and monk can use cool combos. Or maybe skald, hunter, summoner, and druid can do 1000 points of damage in a round at fifth level. It could be a shaman ability effectively cancels out the benefit of another class feature that makes one or both of them waste a turn accidentally.

1 to 50 of 75 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>