Hezzilreen the Cunning

Perignan's page

Goblin Squad Member. RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 7 Season Star Voter. 30 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My portcullis was barely bent, but I live way up north :) The medium copper dragon could not stand on its own though. The wings were straight up instead of spread out so I had to use hot/cold water to fix them.

The paint jobs are really nice overall though. But like it has been said before the rarity of some minis are off (from a usability point of view). And there is a lot of small minis in a case (3 derros, 4 pugwampis, 6 ratfolks and 4 halflings for me).

I also do not like most of the dungeon dressing, but I might be biased since I use Dwarven Forge for those. The knight statue is nice, but the door and portcullis are pretty useless to me, and they take a large rare slot, so I am really unhappy with that. But I knew it beforehand, so it’s not like I was surprised by it. I guess it’s just a way for me to state that I would be in favor of having the dressing pieces in another product line instead of where they actually are.

Overall still a good set though. My favorite minis from this set are the blue dragon, minotaur guardian and the viper vine. I think the viper vine surprised me the most.

Least favorite (besides the dungeon dressings) would be the halfling butcher, the pretty goblin and the ice devil. The first 2 because I don’t need more than one of them and got a bunch. The devil because it’s really bland.

Marco Massoudi wrote:

-The Bloodstained Altar would also make most sense if it was 2 squares long and 1 square broad, so a medium mini can be layed on it.
It will probably not displace a large mini though, as it isn´t that massive.

Both the door and the altar displace a large mini. You can put a medium mini on the altar, but the mini will likely be too long for it to stay within the altar limit. It should not fall though if placed properly.

Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7

Same here. If you would like to share your thoughts, i would welcome them.

Eye Sockets Bracer
Aura moderate transmutation; CL 7th
Slot wrist; Price 56,000 gp; Weight 1 lb.
When this chitin bracer is created, it has four empty eye sockets. These sockets can each be filled by a pair of eyes from any creature. To do so, the wearer needs to touch the eyes of a dead creature, transferring them in the bracer.

Once at least a pair of eyes is absorbed, the wearer can switch those eyes with his, once per day, with no duration limit. If the creature which eyes you switch to has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: racial perception bonus, darkvision, low-light vision, see in darkness, light sensitivity, light blindness. Furthermore, if the creature had a gaze attack, the wearer is immune to this gaze attack while he has the creature’s eyes.

The wearer’s eyes are transferred into the bracer while the power is in effect. Removing the bracer can only be done while the wearer has his own eyes or is dead.

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, alter self Cost 28,000 gp

1 person marked this as a favorite.

First off, let me preface this by saying that I haven’t read most comment yet, so I might be repeating ideas that were already thrown around the forum. I apologize if that is the case. It simply means that I add my voice to those who already said them. Also, this is just my opinion, not facts. I’m merely saying what I would have liked. Now, let’s look at the class.

Flavor-wise, I was really glad to see a skald. Viking bard are my favorite type of bard. Then only thing that concerned me at first was the possibility of being too similar to the savage skald archetype.

The thing is that they both have a performance related to inciting rage. Since we are keeping the same flavor as the archetype, I would have like a different take on the class, more barbarian than bard. I would have ditched the spell casting altogether. For the poetry stuff, I would have borrowed from the Pathfinder Chronicler prestige class and given something like Epic Tales, linguistics bonus and so on. Keep the writing related to performance instead of spell casting.

Speaking of performance, like many have said, either revamp the rage bonus, or stick with inspire courage. Maybe an enhance version of it? Inspire heroics too. Maybe having the choice of having a performance going for all the party, of two performances going for one ally? Giving access to rage powers (except totem powers) while under the effect of the performance? With a full BAB and performance, the skald can be an effective melee combatant, if somewhat fragile. Better than a bard, less than a full barbarian, but at increasing their allies’ effectiveness at the same time.

All in all, I really like the concept, but in my mind, it should have been much more barbarian than bard.

First off, let me preface this by saying that I haven’t read most comment yet, so I might be repeating ideas that were already thrown around the forum. I apologize if that is the case. It simply means that I add my voice to those who already said them. Also, this is just my opinion, not facts. I’m merely saying what I would have liked. Now, let’s look at the class.

Flavor wise, I don’t think the class was necessary. We already have a brawler and unarmed fighter archetype for the fighter. That said, it can still be done differently enough mechanic-wise to be interesting. I see this class as more of a MMA fighter that a kung-fu artist.

For the mechanic, I would have done it differently, but with the same goal in mind. I would have gone gunslinger/monk, if only to get the grit mechanic. From the gunslinger, I would have kept the BAB, the grit and deeds and nimble. From the monk, I would have kept the saves, unarmed strike and the bonus feats. To that, I would have added something that allows the brawler to use gloves-like weapons (cestus, brass knuckles, rope gauntlet, etc.) to be used with the unarmed strike damage die. That way, if you want to beat magic DR, you can enchant yourself some cestus and go to town. I would have tried to avoid any supernatural abilities.

Now, to the fun part. I would have used the grit mechanic to give him maneuvers-like deeds. For example, you could have an “eye gouge” that blind or dazzle for a round. Jumping knee to the head that stagger, low punch that sickened, leg swipe that trip, etc. You can mimic trip, dirty trick, stunning fist and all while leaving the brawler free to take other feats, like TWF, chokehold, improve grapple, etc. You could then add deeds like “rush” to close a distance rapidly (move up to half your speed as a swift action maybe) and things like that, to make sure that the brawler stay up close and personal with monsters. Admittedly, some of those look a lot like the unarmed fighter archetype in result (see my comment about the flavor).

For me, it would have resulted in a more “realistic” fighter compared to the monk, and with different mechanics than the fighter archetypes.
Overall, the brawler as-is is kind of middle pack for me, but mainly because I don’t like the open feat slot and flurry of blows.

First off, let me preface this by saying that I haven’t read most comment yet, so I might be repeating ideas that were already thrown around the forum. I apologize if that is the case. It simply means that I add my voice to those who already said them. Also, this is just my opinion, not facts. I’m merely saying what I would have liked. Now, let’s look at the class.

As someone who liked the Ultimate Magus prc from 3.5, I like the idea of mixing innate magic with learned magic. With the addition of bloodline, it had the potential for something really cool.

Unfortunately, I don’t really like how this plays out. I haven’t play tested the class, but it seems overpowered at first. It basically gets most of what is good in a wizard and all the good stuff of spontaneous spell casting. I mean, it’s like a sorcerer that can change all his spells each day, without penalty. Sure, you lose a bit on the bloodline stuff, and arcane bond, but you get so much versatility with your spells that it more than compensates for it.

I think I would have gone with one of two directions. One would be normal wizard spell casting but with the option to spontaneously cast your bloodline spell, a bit like what cleric can do with cure spells. You can put some other stuff around, like blood focus, or slower progression to balance things out. I just think that the current spell casting method is too strong.

The other option would be to give a lot of spell slot, but slower progression and less spell know. You can even give spell slot with no spell know, to be use with metamagic. That would make the arcanist in the metamagic niche. It gives versatility (in a sense), more lasting power, but less raw power. You can keep something akin to blood focus to make sure the arcanist can use his extra spell slot to do many things, like increase DC for example.

I think I prefer the second option myself, as I see the arcanist as more of a caster with a deeper power source (he got two in fact) than a wannabe sorcerer-who-turned-wizard because his blood is not good enough. I just don’t know how it would balance out and would probably need a lot effort.

You might also want to adjust the name or the description of the Bones spirit hex "Fearful Gaze", since the description reads "With a single shout...".

Fearful Voice? if it stays gaze, is it a gaze attack?

Don't know if it has been said, but the third sentence in the Shaman's Familiar entry refer to the witch:

"Familiars also aid a witch by granting her skill bonuses."

I'm sure it would have been caught later, but i thought i might as well post it.

Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7

Thank you guys for the review. That should help a lot for next year. Now, if i can allow myself to explain on some of you concerns:

weight: i know it's heavy, but i tried to go for something realistic. A real monkey that size is about 8lbs. But then, it's a golden monkey, as in, made of gold. So in fact, it should have been a lot heavier than this, but i thought 20lbs was a good middle ground.

skills: i wanted it to be useful to party without rogue-like characters. So i gave it some roguish skills, but i didn't want it to replace a character (long term). I figured that +10 was sufficient for regular task (lot of mechanical traps have a DC 20 to disarm, so that's roughly 50%) but it not high enough to replace an actual character.

chest: the chest cost is actually the cost of the focus for the spell, so i just did not change it.

Overall, i tried for it to NOT be a figurine of power but really an animated object, more like a rope of climbing. I added the chest part to make it "special" to be honest, but i guess it didn't work out so well.

But still, it was a learning experience, so i'll try to be better next year!

thank you!

Star Voter Season 6, Star Voter Season 7

Since the thread is not long dead, i'll post the item i submitted and see what you guys thought of it. If the judges would be so kind as to post what they thought at the time (if they kept their notes:)), that would be great too!

Here it is:

Golden Monkey of Greed
Aura moderate conjuration and transmutation; CL 9th
Slot none; Price 17,500 gp; Weight 20 lbs.
This life-sized golden statue of a Tiny monkey is sitting with is mouth opened, waiting to be fed. Putting a gold piece in its mouth, which is a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity, has two effects.

The first effect is the activation of the statue for 1 minute. Once activated, it becomes a Tiny animated object with a hardness of 5 and 20 hit points. It can be ordered to use its Disable Device skill to open a lock or disable a mechanical trap, using a total modifier of +10. Likewise, it can be ordered to use its Sleight of Hand skill to steal an item from someone, using a total modifier of +10, and bring it back to the person who activated it. After 1 minute, the golden monkey of greed return to its original state and cannot be activated again for 1 hour.

The second effect sends the gold piece in a chest specifically created for this purpose. The cost of such chest can never be less than 5,000 gp. The chest can be linked to multiple golden monkeys of greed, as long as they have the same creator. The creator is than free to collect the gold pieces amassed by his monkeys anytime he wants, but the chest cannot hold more than 20,000 gp. Any extra gold pieces are lost.

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, pilfering hand, secret chest; Cost 8,750 gp

Wouldn't Vital strike be useful with a AoO build? say a fighter with a reach weapon and combat reflexes. No harm in doing more damage for those attacks, and when he got to move, that will be an option too (if he cannot charge)

Or is there something that makes it impossible to use it on AoO?

I, for one, would like to keep the fiction, but change it so it is more tied to the AP. As others have said, a short story on Ameiko, or Nualia, would have been perfect in RotRL. Or what have been done in AP #18.

Either way would be fine with me.

What if Rovagug's prison was slowly crumbling away and that in order to keep him there, something had to be done? Maybe that something was Aroden giving away his essence so that Asmodeus could strenghten the prison.

That way, Aroden had to choose between letting Rovagug go free and kill humanity, of letting Asmodeus control it.

The Eye of Abendego might be the "plug" that keep Rovagug from getting out, or something to that effect.

Granted, i havent read all Pathfinder material (yet), so maybe there is something somewhere making that theory invalid...

CaroRose wrote:

Are you set on Arcane Strike? You only get one Swift action per round, and by 7th level the bard would already have a +2 to her attacks & damage due to the archaeologist's luck, as well as she will likely already have a magic weapon. It may be a better investment to take another one of the other suggested feats, or something that extends/improves her achaeologist's luck.

The healing in combat thing seems like it has some widely varied opinions. In our group (we usually have only 3 players as well) we have taken the stance of if someone in combat gets down to 1/3 hitpoints, the healer is moving in to keep them up and fighting. The reasoning being that if one of your people goes down then you're down to 2/3 strength rather than 3/4. The 'reputation' of this particular AP seems to show it as highly deadly, even within the first chapters.

If you want examples, check out NobodysHome's campaign log, or even Gluttony's log. Both have had some very near TPKs, with multiple healers, and multiple dropped characters eeking by with some quick in-battle healing. Yeah its not a lot of healing, but sometimes just a few more points is all you need to carry you to your next action.

Let me think a little more on the bard management issue. See if I can come up with some other suggestions. I may have to play with a build or two.

Im not dead set on Arcane strike, but getting +1 to +5 to hit and damage is kinda tempting. And will lingering performance, it means you can use it 2 rounds out of 3. So at level 7, your looking at +2/+2 for 1st round, then +4/+4 for rounds 2 and 3. That seems pretty much the best you can get for a bard that wishes to do any kind of damage. But that's just theory... never actually seen it in game.

I'll take a look at the 2 threads you suggested, see if i'll have the same kind of problems.

Same here. I love the set, paint jobs are really nice. Unfortunatly, i am missing 2 minis(Aldern Foxglove and Warchief Ripnugget).

I also had 4 minis that were broken (nothing a little glue couldn't fix though).

The worse thing though is the Rune Giant. what's up with those pants?!?

Oh well, overall, a really nice set, but a bit on the costly side.

Good points CaroRose, but unrelated to the roguish part of the character ;) But you're absolutly right that the expanded spellcasting will come in handy, if only to lighten the load of the wizard buff-wise.

But im not sure it will help with the healing. How often do you cast a "cure" spell in combat? It rarely matter, because it doesnt heal enough. And out of combat healing, cure light is the better hit points/cost ratio, so it's all the same. At least in my game.

For the Vagabond child, it was already the second trait i had in mind for the character, but some might argue that with the bonus the archaeologist get, it doesnt really matter in the end. But it's nice to have for the first book or two.

The problem (for the player) with the bard is that there is a lot to manage. You need a swift action for Archaelogist luck, another swift action for Arcane strike, then you can either attack or use spells. Since we are talking about a beginner here, that's a lot to think about (adding lingering performance to the mix if you want to use your swift action for Arcane strike). That's the only thing that stop me from recommending it without second thought, as i think the ranger would be easier to play.

But let's say she does play the bard, any build you recommend? I tried to build an archer, but barring the human extra feat it looks like that:

1: PBS
3: Precise shot
5: lingering performance?
7: Deadly aim? rapid shot? many shot? arcane strike? extend?
9: anything that wasnt taken at 7...

Even if you go human, as a "skill monkey", focused study is tempting.

and if she goes melee (leaving the party without a ranged specialist), you either go STR (and it doesnt fit the character she wants to play) or weapon finesse, and with the latter, you become inefficient in melee, at high level anyway. I though about multiclassing with lore warden, for more option and combat manoeuvers, but again, at high level, inefficient.

any suggestions? :)

CaroRose wrote:
I would suggest the bard archaeologist to your 3rd player. Then you have a damage dealer (barbarian), your arcane caster (wizard) and a roguish player with some limited healing who can also utilize healing wands, etc.

Out of curiosity, why is archaeologist more roguish than the urban ranger for you? Is it only the rogue talents?

Both can disarm all traps (although the bard doesnt have disable device as a class skill). Both can use healing wands. On my side, the only difference i see is that the bard is more knowledge oriented and can be the party's face, while the ranger will bring more damage (FE, AC, full BAB).

Playing 2 characters, while it would solve many problems, is not really an option. They don't really want to do it and would highly prefer that i play DM PC (which i won't). I know it would have been a great solution, but not possible in this case.

as for what class to play, i agree that player 1 would be best served with a fighter, but im worried that the party will lack skills if he does so. Barbarian seems a good compromise (more or less the same firepower, more skills, less defense), but that might change.

For player 2, he read the arcane bond ability and liked it, so he wants to go wizard. At first, i was tempted to convince him not to (option paralysis, as you put it), but wizard is such a good fit for this campaign that i will let him decide.

Player 3 is still undecided between bard archaeologist, urban ranger or trapper ranger. Since they have not "healer", im not sure trapper ranger is a good idea (potions are not cheap), and urban ranger would leave the party "faceless", although more efficient in combat. Hard to do an archer bard, between all the archery feats, lingering performance, arcane strike, etc.

But thanks for all the suggestions :)

Naz Nomad wrote:

My "house rule" is for the players to create two characters. One stays in the tavern while the other goes on the adventure. A player can change characters any time they want (so long as it involves them being in the same place) but they must be played as different entities. It allows for already known death replacements too. That would allow your smaller group some flexibility. Playing them as the same person, even siblings, will result in removal of the privilege.

Alternatively, let them play multi-classed characters from 1st, don't use XP but let them level at the "speed of story" so their character abilities match the difficulty. 25 points allows that easily.

Arcane casting can be offset with wands and Use Magic Device. Even try a summoner or a Magus to give beefier arcane casting options.

Lack of divine casting can be offset by healing potions and buff potions if required, which is expensive but you can expand any of the potential potion sources to allow that.

But at the end of the day, if you DM in a balanced and flexible way, the lack of particular classes won't matter too much.

I like the idea of replacement characters, but im not sure my players would. They already put all their efforts learning one class, asking them to learn two would just be a burden. But im definatly keeping the idea in mind.

The party looks to be shaping as a barbarian, a wizard and either an urban ranger or a bard archaeologist. So they'll either be light on damage, or have no real party face. I guess i'll just throw more consumables to be found and we should be good.


Hi all,

I’ll start GMing a RotRL campaign soon and I’ve got a group of 3 players. The 3 players have a bit of experience (2 short campaigns, one in PF, one in 3.5). Now, i want them to run the campaign without having to run a DM PC. Here is what i have so far:

Player 1: will play a melee of some sort, but don’t want it to be complex. No spellcasting if possible, no paladin (last class he played). I know he likes to hit hard and not be hit in return.

Player 2: hesitate between wizard, oracle and witch. Sometimes have trouble picking the right spells, so I’m helping a bit on that hand.

Player 3: wants to play a shaddy character. She played a rogue in the past and liked it. Last character was a sorcerer and thought that while cool, was too much to handle. Likes things simple. I was thinking Bard Archaeologist, or maybe Ranger (trapper or urban).

Now, they play in this campaign to have fun more than anything else, because they are not avid gamers. So i don’t want to force anything on them. But, i would like some input from people who have played the campaign to tell me if they have a chance. I read the entire book, but i want input from people who have played it. My guess is that an arcane caster of some sort is really important, especially near the end. And i think there is enough traps to make trapfinding worthwhile.

Other things of note for the campaign: It’s gonna be a 25 pts buy, maybe extra gold at start (maybe 200). I was hoping not to change any encounter, but might play some monsters dumber than they really are to help them a bit. I will allow them to recruit NPC if they do the right thing, but im not gonna give it to them free.

Thanks in advance for any advice you can give.

Chris Lambertz wrote:
That post is in reference to our regular adventure paths. I still have some confirming to do *if* we're going to be releasing the extra bits for this product as a separate PDF product for purchase.

well, for what it's worth, *if* you do it, i'll buy it :)

feytharn wrote:

I remember that I read somewhere around here that they planned 'interactive maps' for extra purchase, I don't know if they will do so for already published APs.

Edit: found it

Thanks for the info! I'll wait for that i guess.

Chris Lambertz wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:
8) I can print out the player handouts from the PDF so I don't have to cut up the pages of my pretty book.
I might not have mentioned, but there is also a third PDF in the PDF package that is just handouts for easy printing :)

Is there a way to only buy the handouts PDF? I bought the hardcopy and i had no intention to buy the PDF, but the handouts would sure be handy to have...

Anyway, just wondering if it's available somewhere.