Phil Tobin's page

I already mentioned Kaer Maga, but I would also be interested in more scenarios in Ustalav
and we need to visit Casmaron.

Heck yeah. I love the weirdness that is Kaer Maga! It really provides some unique role playing experiences.

Let's go back to Kaer Maga!

what was put in the OP of this thread.

I like the errata from Jason. A couple of observations/questions:

I agree that Disable Device should be a skill, as both base classes can work with devices (if the ranger chooses trap building)

I agree the talent list is short. The rules state only one sneak attack talent can be applied at a time, but I only see one such talent.

Is combat training (select one combat feat) really meant to be a one time selection? According to the description unless otherwise noted a talent can only be selected once, and combat training doesn't say otherwise.

The assassinate talent is a bit weak, but the same was true for the assassin. As an advanced feat it can't be selected till 10th level by a slayer. With an int of 14 that means a DC of 17 (10+5+2). However, a ranger/rogue/assassin can get the equivalent at 6th level (character not class), but at 10th level (character not class) will also only have a DC 17 (10+5+2).

I compared a 2 weapon fighting 17th level assassin (3 ranger/4 rogue/10 assassin) against a 17th level slayer and while the assassin had a slightly higher average damage potential per hit if the hit was not a critical due to an extra 2d6 sneak attack, the slayer had would due more damage over all due to the superior BAB bonus especially if Quarry is applied. The increased likelihood of crating and the fact that the target and quarry bonuses would be multiplied also increase the overall damage potential of the slayer over the assassin.

One more question, if someone built a slayer/assassin would the assassinate advanced talent and death attacks stack and if so how?

I need to try building a sniper build.

I have seen a few sorcerer/paladin builds that were quite effective. The sorcerer/paladin/dragon disciple for example. I had a PFS character like that early on, and I have seen a few since then. You get even more of that surprise factor you mention. Not only do you have the paladin casting arcane spells, but then either grows claws or uses his breath weapon!

armac wrote:

I don't mind seeing the odd set of adventures for PFS form a storyline, but my personal belief is that it is very important to keep most of the scenarios so that they can be run separately, at any time and in any order.

+1...although, I like to see a "special" mod or series released at major conventions. The four "extra" scenarios released each year at GenCon are perfect for this.

What they could try would be something done a couple of times in LG and LFR has been doing a lot is creat a "mini-series" with some specific PC options and a very tight story arch. Players run that character through the arch. I enjoy that, although some players don't care for trying to commit a character to story arch.

I would agree with the running scenarios cold problem. In many of the previous living style campaigns, a scenario might be 30 to 50 pages long (some were way longer than that), and some went into a bit more detail about knowledge or gossip the PCs could gather. Most had a lot more boxed text. Anyone who played LG long enough can probably remember mods where you had half a page or more of boxed text.

The PFS scenarios are not organized that way. They have a limited word count so a judge can prep it without having to spend all day just reading it. But that means that a judge needs to prep it and add character to it and make the NPCs come alive. You do that and you should be able to bring some of the back story in. I love judging the scenarios with a certain mad painter them. Its more than just reviewing the stat blocks like LG sometimes was.

Now that assumes that the players actually want to role play and that they ask the NPCs questions.

That said, some do have back story that is almost impossible to bring out.

I actually think though, that the PFS scenarios have been more original than many of the LG scenarios were, especially the Cores.

I do agree though that I miss the chance to shape storylines, and the sense of a bigger plot that you often had in the LG Regional scenarios.

Yes, I know we have the Shadow Lodge story, but so far that has been a bit vanilla and boring. I would love to see a story arch in PFS like you see in the Adventure Paths.

Yes, but chapter 8 of PFS Guide gives several options for having the lycanthropy removed. Unless the party screwed up royally they should have the gp or the PA at the end of the scenario to have the lycanthropy removed, even at Tier 1.

Phil Tobin wrote:

I do have one recommendation for the staff:

If you have a scenario, like this and Azlant Ridge that are potentially more lethal, or if you have a scenario that is more of a role playing scenario; identify this in the blurb. When you have scenarios at these extremes, it may not appeal to all players so identifying it may avoid some frustration.

IMO, this is why we have GMs. But I suppose it would help folks who just see it for the first and are running it cold. But you will have the same sorts of problems no matter what you run if you are running it cold.

My point is that while some players enjoy variety in the types of RPG experiences, some players have a definite preference. If you include a quick statement like "A role playing scenario that..." then those players who don't like those types of scenarios will skip them and they will avoid frustration." Likewise for particularly lethal scenarios. There are some scenarios that may be particularly difficult to run in such a way as to meet the preferences of players at the table.

For example, there have been a couple of scenarios where the tier 3 - 4 encounters were so ridiculously easy, that it was almost impossible to challenge a group of players that wanted a tactical challenge.

Likewise, if the scenario is a linear dungeon crawl with traps and monsters, it may be impossible to make it appeal to those looking for a role playing experience.

But hey, it is only a suggestion. I personally like both role playing and combat encounters, but I acknowledge that some players have different preferences.

I am looking forward to playing part III, but I will make sure I have a better balanced table.

** spoiler omitted **

Ok. I just finished playing this scenario a couple of hours ago and it is a very challenging scenario, and it was close to being a TPK. I will admit that at the time, I was a little frustrated, because we had nothing to negate the final boss' advantage. A very luck die roll turned things to our advantage allowing us to avoid what I was afraid would be a TPK.

But now looking back on it, I have to say it was brutally challenging for us for a couple of reasons:

1. We had gotten used to scenarios that often were not this challenging.
2. We were not a balanced table; we had no arcane caster. Unfortunately, this can happen at a Con. Talking to people who had played this with arcane casters, many of them found the final encounter to be much easier.
3. There were a number of ways to defeat the final encounter, we were just unlucky to have none of those resources/options. That is just the bad luck of table mixes at a con. I did pick up some items to help with similar situations in the future.

Looking back at the challenge, I can also now say it was exciting and put some of that old fear and uncertainty back in the game and will future scenarios more exciting, because I have been reminded that my PC can die.

I do have one recommendation for the staff:
If you have a scenario, like this and Azlant Ridge that are potentially more lethal, or if you have a scenario that is more of a role playing scenario; identify this in the blurb. When you have scenarios at these extremes, it may not appeal to all players so identifying it may avoid some frustration.