I get that it's hard. The info about the pre-gens was useful, but not one post addressed my original question. Not surprised. I haven't played it yet but I have played hard scenarios. Also, you didn't mention your class (or i missed it) so i can't be class specific. My suggestion is a potion of CMW for everyone. I know you have a life oracle but what if that PC goes down. You'll need a back up to get him up. Get area effect attacks like alchemist fire. And lastly, grab silversheen, oil of bless weapon and cold iron and/or adamantine weapons. Nothing will make combat go sideways than DR and swarms if you're not prepared.
We had some volunteers telling mobs of people to sort themselves out and just let them know when they could seat a full table. I don't believe it should be the players' jobs to assemble themselves, but the responsibility should fall on the mustering volunteer. Can you explain this a bit more? I have the complete opposite opinion. If the person mustering has to build tables it'll become an auction, "I need a fighter on table 3, fighter on table 3." (seven hands go up) "4th level fighter with 55hps and tanks" (four hands go down), "65 hps, going once, twice, ..." I've seen it when putting the responsibility of table-building with the muster-volunteer created a huge bottle neck. I've also seen tables rejecting a player because he/she didn't meet their power or class standards and the muster-volunteer asks someone else to appease the rejecting table. That is not a situation for anyone to create or experience. It's faster when players build themselves into a table of six and elects one person to represent that group who alone approaches the muster-volunteer to be sat. This is how I instruct everyone when I muster. It clears the area so everyone isn't mobbed around me and I can easily sit up to 10 tables in less than 10min. I've seen a smaller mob take 20-30 min when their table-building with the person mustering. I have the firm belief and experience to prove players can call out what PC they want to play, what tier and fill an available slot quickly. The player can also listen to a table call out its need for a certain class to balance it, and if they have that character, the player can raise their hand to be welcomed to that slot.
Hey all, I would like to ask the community here if they have any recommendation for a steampunk RPG. I've done some research of my own and have a list of RPGs. What I'm looking for is feedback by those who played any steampunk. Any pro/con comments would be helpful. Much appreciated.
What I like to do is describe the spell both visually and the physical effect but not by name. If a PC succeeds on a spellcraft is the only time I name the spell. I also do this with readied actions, delay in initiative, and current spell effects. I think describing the visual, in character situation beats technical, meta-game description. For example, I can say, "(pointing to the BBEG mini) She casts an unholy blight here. (pointing to minis) You need to make a Fort save DC 17." Instead I say, "The priestess of Asmodeus raises her unholy symbol. She shouts an incantation igniting the symbol in a black light. A miasma inky cloud surrounds 'Betty', 'Bob' & 'Jack' (Jack is a paladin and the only good-aligned PC). Jack appears to experience more pain that Betty and Bob. Roll me a Fort save." I then ask their final number and give them their damage. Only if we're pressed for time do I give the DC in advance to speed up play. For readied or delay I describe their action and not just announce the technical description of the action. One issue I find with this is players are used to hearing the technical name of the action or spell name. They get confused sometimes and ask follow up questions. At conventions it tends to slow up play until they get used to it. I tell them if the PC doesn't know and the party doesn't have spellcraft they'll need to roleplay. I won't describe the action in meta-game terms unless the entire party is lost, which only happens when the table make up is all meta-gamers. The majority of time it works.
I have positives, negatives and suggestion(s) for thought about this scenario. I'm a fan of constructive criticism as opposed to complaints. Please take these comments as constructive. Spoiler:
Positive: I was glad to see PCs were able to use Diplomacy to achieve the overall objective of the scenario. It mixes it up from scenarios that point Pathfinders in a direct path and everything leads to combat. Negative: The scenario plays very short when the party has a Diplomacy buff PC. Our table finished the mod at a con in 1.5 hours. I didn't get a warm and fuzzy about it. Money is spent to attend a con. Players would like the gaming experience to last close to the 4-hour duration alloted in the slot. (This includes game days as well) Suggestion: Include DM notes for cases when the scenario is running fast. These notes could include ideas for wandering monsters or perhaps difficult roleplay situations to engage the entire party, not just the Diplomacy buff PC (yes, other players can talk but their value to the encounter is a diplomacy roll most likely an assist to the primary diplomacy buff PC). In this scenario, as an example, after the PCs convince Zamir to join the Pathfinder Society he could ask to be escorted to Abasolom, or where ever, to 'sign up'. Along the way there are possibilities for wandering monsters or NPCs who don't want to see him switch sides. Positive: The missions take effort to accomplish. Negative: First, with Diplomacy shortening the mod the wizard missions became hand-waving accomplishments. Second, the statue parts mission was clumsy to accomplish. Since we made Zamir friendly the DM gave us free run of the keep. We busted up statues for the parts, which didn't seem realistic. In game, these statues have a gold piece value to construct. I don't see, roleplay-wise, NPCs letting us bust up their equipment. Suggestion: This one is difficult. What I can say is having the overall Pathfinder objective tied to one type of approach (combat, diplomacy, etc) makes DMs scratch their heads when things go off track. This suggestion is apart from accomplishing faction missions with a Knowledge or Diplomacy check. What I mean is, if the PCs resolve a situation in the scenario using diplomacy, but the scenario is worded in such a way it suggests PCs are attempting to accomplish their faction missions after combat, or via combat, it creates issues for the DM to mitigate and PCs to succeed. Positive:The scenario has a good mix of encounters. Negative: PCs won't get a chance to experience the encounters. We went from Act 2 straight to the conclusion using diplomacy. Suggestion: As an alternative, which adds to my first suggestion above, Zamir's relationship could be strained. If the party convinces him to join the Pathfinder Society perhaps there's an underlying situation that triggers. This could play out as optional if the scenario is playing fast. Perhaps a rival or rogue monk (not by class but an opportunist masquerading as a monk or maybe a monk who feels Zamir is behaving chaotic by joining the Society) takes over the monastery with a loyal crew. This results in the PCs fighting their way out, or perhaps to the basement to rescue the wizards. This will bring back all the cool stuff written in the scenario putting the slot duration back on track.
I hope the feedback was helpful for future scenarios. Or, perhaps, DMs who run it as a private game could take advantage of my notes. Good mod, Craig. I wish my table could have experienced it cover to cover. 
|
