Renvale987's page

93 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 93 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Not sure if I am posting in the right place, but I was thinking of writing a module and posting it for free for people to use. Is this the place I could post it so people in the community can use it? Or is there another forum that is more appropriate?

I would also like some suggestions on how to post it. Could I just google doc it and allow public access or?

Any and all replies are appreciated. Thank You.

bitter lily wrote:
Or take nausea bombs away from alchemists...

Once I removed the condition suddenly my players no longer wanted to play Alchemists.

I'm a firm believer that no amount of playtesting (no matter how amazing. Thanks Paizo :D), cannot account for players who wish to break the system.

I'm also a firm believer in nerfing broken class features, feats and spells often and with prejudice.

I completely removed the nauseated condition and any spells, potions or effects that caused it from games I ran. Mainly because I had more than one player make an alchemist and min-max his/her nausea bomb so that any fight against things that could be nauseated was smashed easily.

Its a broken condition, period. My suggestion Mrakvampire is just remove it from your game and move on.

Anyone know if this is in the works, coming down the pipe or not even on the current radar?

Hello Friends,

I am going to be running ROTRL starting Friday, and I had some questions regarding party composition and power level.

It is going to be a three man party (Two PC's, one DMPC. Yay small towns).

I believe my two players will be playing an Orc barbarian and a halfing ranger respectively. I have no idea what to make to compliment them. My first instinct is a Celestial Sorcerer who studies with clerics to get a few healing spells. It mentions in the sorcerer entry that sorcerer's can study other spells to learn them, even if its not on their normal list. I don't think I could manage playing a full blown cleric. What do all of you think?

Second, I have to wonder, given that I played through this module a few years a go and remember the numerous character deaths, that a three man party can and will be overwhelmed at times. Any suggestions to alleviate this?

Thank you for reading and I appreciate your responses (assuming you do lol).

Personally, I would have your player add half his sleight of hand skill modifier to the profession check, and maybe give a +2 to +4 bonus on his check as well due to loaded dice/cards.

Initially, he/she is going to do very well in making money. However, I would use a chance of 5% per week of getting caught cheating (5% the first week, 10% the second week). If you keep taking the house and winning, people are going to wonder. However, I would also allow him/her to lower the chance of getting caught by taking a week off. So, say said character is up to a 30% chance of getting caught this week, so he decided to let the cards and dice cool and not play. For every week he doesn't play, he lowers his chance of getting caught by 2%.

It is a bit abstract, but I think it would work well enough. Its involved enough he/she could develop a strategy to it, but not complicated enough to slow down the game.

We house-ruled this ability as follows;

When you go invisible with an item with undetectable, you cannot be seen by any means unless the creature/NPC perceiving you is of the same mythic tier as yourself or higher. Mundane things have no chance of seeing you.

As a GM, this means for me that yes, mooks and lesser mythic creatures will get pummeled by the rogue/ninja. Frankly, rogues and ninja's overall damage is bad anyway so this helps them a lot. However, boss guys and such are not going to get screwed over.

No mister mythic rogue, you're not going to sneak into mythic dragon lair and coup-de-grace him.

I've searched the forums and I could not find any thread answering my specific question about this ability.

Since Wild Arcana is listed as a supernatural ability (Su), does this mean it reduces the casting time of the spell to a standard action, since most supernatural abilities are standard actions themselves? Another words, you use Wild Arcana to cast a summon monster spell, and it is no longer a full round to cast.

As well, does it negate the use of spell components as a supernatural abilities, much like spell-like abilities?

Any help would be appreciated.

According the Bestiary, tremorsense senses everything touching the ground within range. No perception check needed, an earth elemental just goes "there is a dude behind this wall 20 ft away in that square".

However, in the Core Rulebook, it states that creatures with tremorsense get a +8 perception check bonus to pinpoint anything on the ground and automatically make (not succeed) such checks.

Which one is correct? I personally feel like tremorsense should not be blindsense with x-ray vision, but a lesser form of blindsense. I'm inclined to go with the Core Rulebook on this, feeling as though it should supersede all other rules.

So, one of my PC's is playing a Stone Lord and has an earth elemental pet. As a group we are curious how attacking works for the earth elemental when it comes out of the ground.

1. Can it just come partially out of the earth and attack, and if so does it have cover when it does so?

2. Does it have to make a perception check when it comes out of the earth to figure out where enemies are and the state of the battle, or can it rely solely on its tremor sense and not worry about it?

3. When it comes out of the earth to attack, does it catch the NPC/Mob flat footed when it attacks, if he/she/it was unaware of it?

Any help would be appreciated.

I disagree Chaos. Mainly because after running a mythic game, many fights went well beyond 10 rounds, even at lower level, given the number abilities being used by PC's and mythic bad guys. So no, 1 point does not equal one fight. And mythic points are not something you should be spending every fight. If you're in a long drawn out dungeon and you've had 10-12 encounters before the BBEG and you've spent the majority of your mythic points to ignore power attack penalties, you could very well be out of them.

I think people are missing the point about Furious Focus. There are builds out there that completely revolve around AoO's. You also forget that Mythic points are a finite resource (until 10th teir, but you're a god at that point anyway).

Basically, if your build revolves around AoO, you want Furious Focus as you are not required to spend mythic points to negate your penalties on Power Attack. I'm aware that if you spend a mythic point you ignore the penalties with mythic power attack, but that's just it, you're spending a finite resource.

I'm in a game right now with a halfling tripping monk and a power attacking fighter. When the monk trips something, anyone adjacent to the mob that has been tripped gets an AoO against the mob. It happens a lot. With Furious Focus (if we were mythic), the fighter could power attack at no penalty against tripped opponents and save his mythic points for other things.

I'm currently playing a Cross-blooded Serpentine/Arcane Bloodline sorcerer in Rise of the Runelords. The missing spells known sucks, I will admit, but being able to mix and match abilities from two bloodlines can be pretty awesome, especially if you're going for a schtick type of character that does one thing really well. If it were just spells cast per day it might be a bit OP, but I'm not sure.

thejeff wrote:

Just a thought: what about having the scrolls provide Mythic tiers, rather than regular caster levels?

That way they don't interfere with regular level gain and could provide a significant boost even if they only gave the arcane (Archmage?) version.

The arcane casters are still better off though, which suggests to me that it would be better not to restrict it.

We had a mythic game and I've found, along with my players, that mythic spell-casting is completely broken. I don't want to get into that debate here, but we will never run a mythic game again, due to the unbalance.

I've been racking my brain to try and find something to give flavor to the campaign. The characters are descendants of Karsus, the de-facto Arch-Mage of Faerun. They've found his scroll-case, and I'm debating on letting them find his other items as well.

I'm firm believer that the PC's should be unique but not overpowered. Mythic is OP, but I think maybe powerful magic items, given few and far between and accounted for when making encounters, can make the PC's feel awesome; Hey look, I have Karsus's so and so thing-a-majig and you don't.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I thank everyone for their replies, but I've decided against doing it. I'm being a bit railroady and I realize that. The response was amazing and its one of the reasons I love this community.

Anyway, again, thanks for replies. If you wish to continue to talk about it, I'm okay with that too!

Hello all, here again to ask a question.

In my current Forgotten Realms game, I had a plan to introduce the Nether Scrolls. If you're unfamiliar with what they do, essentially they are set a 50 scrolls. Each scroll you study/read gives you a level in an arcane spell-casting class of a character's choosing.

I planned on introducing them in order to add flavor to my game (as the PC's are descendents of Netherese wizards, the people who found the scrolls). I'm aware how powerful they are and I'm fully capable of adjusting my encounters to match my PC's abilities.

I ran this by one of my player's and his reaction was what I expected, unfortunately, which was I was hosing his character by forcing classes on him that he did not want.

I understand his viewpoint. However, I often feel like players get too caught up in their class and power level in a Pathfinder game, instead of the character they are playing.

Recently, we have been playing a certain Pathfinder module that grants a +1 to WIS or CHA after a certain event. I am playing a fighter in that game and those ability scores were useless to me from a pure stats point of view. However, my character's wisdom went from a 10 to an 11, and I started to role-play her being a little bit more cautious (wiser).

I understand the point of the game is to have fun and all that, but I often feel like GM's nowadays (after reading a lot of posts on here) are being relegated to nothing more than referee's for monsters vs. players instead of storytellers. I wanted to tell my player to just suck it up and realize that he's playing a dwarf from the Sword Coast who loves to smith and is utterly loyal to his companions, not just a paladin.

Am I crazy? Am I making sense at all? This is really bothering me and I'm willing to listen to any and all advice on the matter.

Never multi-class. Ever. Never ever. My group and I have been playing Pathfinder for years now and every character that has multiclassed has turned out to far weaker than a single classed character.

Just don't do it.

Brogue The Rogue wrote:

As an update, I just spent 40 minutes (gmail timed me) fixing a player's sheet for him, after he sent it back...with only one change of the six I requested actually fixed. That change was done incorrectly.

I decided to just do it for him because I'm not sure he's ever going to be able to do it himself. I hate doing that, because it teaches him to be lazy, but what else can I do? :(


How old are your players lol? 14? Jesus. The only time a GM ever asks to see my character sheet is for little stuff, like a save total so he can roll for scrying or some such. I don't think I've ever had a GM have me send him my character sheet to proof read. I'm an adult, I've got it thanks lol.

Sorry, not trying to be a dick. I just find it comical.

JBNACK wrote:
Renvale987 wrote:
There is no roll. Assuming he's in full view of the people he's about to attack, you roll initiative. He's initiating combat while his enemies (whether or not they are is irrelevant) can fully see him. The people he is attacking are aware of him and see him about to attack. There is no surprise. That's how Pathfinder works.
Thank you for your help! I was trying to make it too complicated. Thank you.

No problem. I had the same problem with a Magus in Kingmaker. He generally distrusted anyone not from their country and was quick to attack potential foes. After an hour of discussion, we read the rules and its abstract and doesn't work well, but them's da rules :D.

There is no roll. Assuming he's in full view of the people he's about to attack, you roll initiative. He's initiating combat while his enemies (whether or not they are is irrelevant) can fully see him. The people he is attacking are aware of him and see him about to attack. There is no surprise. That's how Pathfinder works.

Kimera757 wrote:
CWheezy wrote:
You do know that if you fail the 2nd save you are now utterly under their control, and that it lasts DAYS PER LEVEL right?

The spell lasts so long you can get it back the next day while you still have a servant. The psionic Mass Domination power is even more ridiculous, since once use of the power could give you 13 servants! If even one of them is dominated by the end of the day the power is pretty broken.

IMO, this would be better if the duration was only 1 round/level, with no second save. For something longer term, look to Charm Monster, which IMO should not be castable in combat.

I would be totally fine with it being 1/round a level and no second save, totally agree with you on that one.

CriticalQuit wrote:

You know what's a really good way to make Dominate more flexible in its use? Lying.

You have a telepathic connection to your target and no one said you can ONLY use it to give orders. A few bluff checks to work them up into thinking the situation isn't the way it seems, and you can convince them to do all kinds of things that wouldn't be against their nature because they believe the situation to be different and their actions are different in said situation.

TL;DR Make your orders sound like an answer to a fabricated problem, rather than a direct order.

I completely understand your point and according to the parameters of the spell, that's a great way to use it. However, its called DOMINATE person, not "Make a deal with this guy so they don't make a second save and start beating on me again person".

I would also like to note that Dominate person only works on ONE subset of creatures; humanoids. It does not work on:

Monstrous Humanoids
Magical Beasts
Constructs or

So its a narrowly defined spell (at 5th level) that only works on one subset of creatures that gives two saves all the time.

For me, it should only give one save, and if you fail, you're under the spellcaster's control.

I don't think its that dangerous for PC's, given that unless you have multiple spellcasters casting dominate person on all your PC's (which could be just as bad as 5 6th level invisible sorcerers casting 36D6 worth of fireballs at a 10th level party. At that point you're just hosing your party imo).

I think that the "against your nature" thing was put in there to protect PC's so their not hosed. Something to think about I guess.

I thank everyone for their replies. I was a bit angry last night and I apologize if my question came off as bitter and butt-hurt (which I was, I'm lucky enough to realize when I'm being a jerkface).

The DM wasn't a jerk about it at all. He explained his ruling. I spent an hour being bitter and quiet and than Oppressive Boredomed and Terrible Remorsed two demons and felt better. Pains of playing an enchantress is that most, if not all of my spells are save or nothing happens, so when something doesn't save and the spells goes off, I'm very happy.

Needless to say, because the spell is so vaguely worded, I'm just going to change it at 14th level to avoid future butt-hurtedness. There are plenty of other enchantment spells that are pretty good that will work for my sorcerer enchantress.

Again, thank you everyone for your replies. I will still be up to discussing the issue.

It just seems that "against their nature" is something that needs to be worded better or more clearly defined.

After reading the text of the spell I feel as though dominate person isn't remotely a fifth level spell. Here is why.

The spell says that a creature gets a second save at a +2 bonus if it does something against its nature. This essentially means that a PC or enemy will ALWAYS get a second save once you start giving orders.

An evil wizard casts dominate person on the fighter, he fails. "Stand still" the wizard says. The fighter would not idly stand by while his friends are fighting, second save is rolled. "Run away", second save ensues because the fighter would not leave his friends.

In general, the fighter will not want to do anything an evil wizard says (if he knows he's evil, but if its cast in combat, that is probably a given) so any order the wizard gives, the fighter will resist, even if it seems reasonable, given that its not in his nature to do anything an evil wizard tells him too. So its a 5th level spell that always allows two saves to resist its effects.

I cast this spell tonight on an evil wizard and I was told repeatedly that he would not tell me anything about his operation given that giving up secrets to me (an enemy) would be against his nature and therefore get a second save.

In my opinion, I feel like this spell should be a third level spell, given how easy it is to resist. Your chances of saving vs. the spell go up exponentially when you are allowed multiple saves.

Am I wrong in thinking this? I am open to being convinced that its powerful, but I honestly don't see it. A fifth level spell should be powerful; I mean wall of force is of the same level and its one of the best spells in the game.

Hello Pathfinder friends! I haven't been on here in a while, but I was hoping to pick the brains of those infinitely smarter than me.

The Situation:

My rogue is under the affects of Greater Invisibility. I am stalking behind a giant and three mammoths who are leaving a building (big building). I am near the other entrance of said big building, which housed mammoths. I move 5 feet in and decide to take a pot shot at one of the mammoths. I hit said mammoth and it yells loudly (or whatever mammoth's do). The giant, on his turn, gives the order for the mammoths to seek and tells them to go directly towards the other door (which was open, but I did not open it). They of course make a bee-line towards me and get within 5 feet, using scent and begin to pummel my pot-shotting tielfing butt.

I have a problem with this scenario.

First, how does the giant know where the arrow came from? Even if I didn't specify, with all the hair and such that mammoth's have and angle and such, how does the giant know that the arrow came from said other entrance? How did the giant not know I was flying or in one of the mammoth stalls that was in the building?

Second, even after the mammoth's found me, does the giant now have to give the order (spending a standard action during his turn) to give them the order to attack? You can't combine seek, and than add 'attack the thing you found' into a handle animal check, can you?

Needless to say, I felt very butt-hurt (which I apologized for afterwards), but I felt like my DC 53 Stealth check (+36 to stealth plus a 17 on the die), on top of the +20 from invisibility, which makes it a 73, gets nerfed by scent, which CR 1/2 dogs have. It just seems to me that any bad guy would keep dogs, as they completely negate someone's ability to sneak up on them. I made the decision that every bad guy I in my games from now on will keep dogs.

Any help on this would be appreciated.

Thank you.

Kolokotroni wrote:
I think the Houserules/Homebrew Section would be most appropriate.

Thank you Kolo, Liz, Cobalt. You all have been very, very helpful.

Much appreciated.

Does anyone know which forum you're allowed to post your own adventures in?

I have never felt more stupid than I do today asking all these questions.

Liz Courts wrote:
Renvale987 wrote:
Kolokotroni wrote:

What you are looking for is the community use policy.

Edit, basically yes you can make available adventures in golarion if you are not charging for it, just follow the linked community use policy.

After reading that (I honestly hate legal jargon, but I understand its purpose) and reading the products you can use section, I didn't see any of the normal products, like the Bestiary or even the Core Rulebook. Did I miss those or are you not allowed to use those to publish non-profit adventures?
It's under "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook" on the Section 1 list.

Thank you Liz, I apologize for being such a noob. I'm still sifting through all the legal jargon to figure out where/when I need to put disclaimers and such, as I have no desire to get in trouble.

Kolokotroni wrote:

What you are looking for is the community use policy.

Edit, basically yes you can make available adventures in golarion if you are not charging for it, just follow the linked community use policy.

After reading that (I honestly hate legal jargon, but I understand its purpose) and reading the products you can use section, I didn't see any of the normal products, like the Bestiary or even the Core Rulebook. Did I miss those or are you not allowed to use those to publish non-profit adventures?

I'm not sure where to post this and I'm not even sure if I will be able to do it legally, but I had a question about making adventures (modules essentially) and than publishing them for everyone to use on these boards, using Pathfinder products. I'm not looking to make money off of this or anything like that, but I want to get my ideas out there and see what people think of them. I specifically want to make adventures for people to use in Golarion campaign world.

As I said, I'm not entirely sure this is where to ask this question. And again, I'm not looking to make money off of this.

Any help would be appreciated.

Mods-If I'm put this in this in the wrong place, please move it to the right forum. Thank you.


Should not have said an immediate action. I get what you're saying.

A buddies argument is that once a readied action goes off, it becomes that person's turn, so therefore you can interrupt his action with moving away taking a five foot step.

RumpinRufus wrote:

Why would the wizard be able to 5-foot-step as an immediate action? That's definitely not allowed.

But why wouldn't he just 5-foot-step away before he starts casting? That seems like the obvious thing to do, I don't see what the advantage would be of provoking before you use the 5-foot-step.

It specifically says that you can make a five-foot step DURING an action, so during my action of casting my spell, I take a five foot step.

I would no, because the rules state that if both opponents are aware of one another, than you roll initiative normally and combat begins.

You're not taking into account the other person's reflexes. As soon as you make the move to stab said person, you become an enemy trying to kill him.

You're standing right in front of him, he's aware of you and you're initiating combat.

That's why we have intitiative checks. He fails his, you're faster than him, you catch him flat-footed and stab him.

I have a quick question, something that I just thought of and I'm curious to how it works.

Say you have a fighter and a wizard in adjacent squares. Fighter says when the wizard begins casting I try and smack him with my wizard bane killer +5 sword.

Wizard begins casting a spell, Fighter's readied action goes off. Now, as an immediate action, can the wizard take a five foot step away at an angle (or wherever gets him 10 feet away from the fighter)?

It states in the Core rule book that you can take a five-foot step DURING an action, so therefore you can step away while casting a spell.

I am guessing that is why there is the feet Step Up.

Now, second question, wizard steps away, but began casting defensively, does he have to continue to cast defensively if he is no longer being threatened?

Just wondering about this.

So, we had an issue come up last night and I wanted to get people's opinion on it.

Situation: Party is sleeping, except for the lone person who is awake and keeping watch.


A party of bad guys teleport into the location where the PC's are. They did not know the PC's were going to be there but they were looking for the PC's specifically.

Rules Arguments commence.

First, if you teleport into a location, not knowing if the people you are looking for are going to be there, but finding them there, are you considered surprised?

Second, is the person keeping watch, who was not expecting teleportation magic, is he/she surprised?

Third, the people who are sleeping, what is there Perception DC to wake up if someone teleports into the room? Does teleporting into a room make sound?

Yay for dumb situations.

Anybody know the actual rules for this?

Was just playing devil's advocate. That was a best argument I could come up with, so I think people are right in saying, yeah, a paladin torturing folk, demon or not, is bad.

Rynjin wrote:
Renvale987 wrote:
I'm going to play devil's advocate

Kill it! Kill it quickly before it spreads its lies!

Renvale987 wrote:

Demons are not people. They are things. What little emotion they have is twisted and barely resembles mortal emotion, and could be argued that its not emotion at all, as demons always act a certain way (even if that way is chaotic). Another words, the emotion they show is simply a reflex because of what they are made of (chaos and evil). They are extensions of the Abyss, basically tools the Abyss uses to further the abstract goals of chaos and evil. A demon must sow chaos and cause evil.

Demons are more robots to me (that's the best analogy I can come up with), and you can't torture an robot. You just kick it till it does what you want.

Well the difference is, I think, that Demons/Devils/Daemons DO still feel the baser emotions. They feel pain, they feel the fear of death (re-death?), and they DO want to live and continue existing, just like any other living creature.

But the main difference is they want to destroy everything/subjugate everything/destroy all sentient life as their purpose for being instead of most living creature's purpose of "Eat, sleep, procreate, and be comfortable".

Not saying they're sympathetic, not by a long shot, but they do feel that pain and a sort of distorted drive to keep existing, and torturing a demon/devil/daemon is no different from torturing any other creature.

They're not worthy to continue living (by Good standards) but neither should Good abandon their principles just because the things are their sworn enemies.

If you believe something is not worthy enough to live, than why on earth would you care if it felt pain before it died. You've already sentenced it to death. I think you're going down a psychopath's road, and we know that some of them believe that certain people and or demons, are not worth to live, therefore torture isn't really an issue. Death is far worse to torture in my opinion.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here, just because its a good conversation. Understand, I believe whole-heartedly that torture would ruin a paladin's code.

Demons are not people. They are things. What little emotion they have is twisted and barely resembles mortal emotion, and could be argued that its not emotion at all, as demons always act a certain way (even if that way is chaotic). Another words, the emotion they show is simply a reflex because of what they are made of (chaos and evil). They are extensions of the Abyss, basically tools the Abyss uses to further the abstract goals of chaos and evil. A demon must sow chaos and cause evil.

Demons are more robots to me (that's the best analogy I can come up with), and you can't torture an robot. You just kick it till it does what you want.

We had this come up a few minutes ago. If someone is under the effects of Dominate Person, can it be detected by Detect Magic, and if so how does it work?

I know you can use Sense Motive, but we had a wizard with detect magic on when the rogue was hit by a Dominate Person from a book.

Any help would be appreciated.

To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.

Last week, I had a character initiate combat by casting Hold Person on a guy they were standing there talking too. I rolled initiative, and the bard that was getting the hold person cast on him got a higher initiative score than the character.

The PC argued that his spell goes off first in the round, and than everyone goes after that, or he should at least get a surprise round.

I argued that both groups (The PC's and NPC) were aware of one another and that by casting a spell, he's starting combat, therefore everyone rolls initiative and people go in order. I ruled this at first, and the bard beat the PC's initiative, and cast a spell on the PC. Said PC got butt hurt and argued that his spell should go off first.

Who's right?

It feels like you have to plan encounters around the witch, and it forces you to never have a boss stand on his own as the hexes will cripple any foe.

I've had other parties, and had a single cleric hold his own for several rounds. Now I wouldn't ever do that.

So, I have a witch in my Kingmaker game, and I'm honestly afraid of him. His abilities are crippling and it essentially makes it impossible to bring a single creature as a boss.

The hex of misfortune is ridiculous, forcing a creature to roll a dice twice. I know you get a will save, but most creatures have crappy will saves.

Basically he leads with you get -2 to saves hex, misfortune hex, then starts casting crippling spells, like blindness/deafness.

Idk, I might be imagining things, but I am absolutely dreading combat with this guy.

We faced the Stag Lord in Kingmaker, and he absolutely devestated the guy within two rounds. It just feels like I have to plan encounters around him, instead of the party.

If PC's use the Stag Lord's fort as a base to start there first city, in Rivers Run Red it says that it halves the time to build a castle. From my understanding, if you build something in a city, its there at the end of the phase (and its assumed you've been building it beforehand, at least that's how I take it). So does the fort instead halve the COST of the a castle if you start the city there?

Honestly, I feel like they should be immune to fear, as its in the mind, and although it has physical effects, it starts in the mind. Since bugs are immune to anything that starts in the brain, they are immmune to fear.

This came up in the game tonight and I would appreciate some clarification. The Witch in the game used Demoralize on a Huge Centipede. This gives the centipede the shaken condition.

What kind of penalty is shaken's penalties? Is it generic, morale? Shaken is just a lesser form or Fear, but I wanted to say that since a bug is mindless, you screaming at it or whatever you do to demoralize isn't going to work, since its immune to mind-affecting effects.

Wasn't sure how this worked exactly.

Just to give an update on how things are going in my game.

The PC's got the end of Stolen Lands, murdered the crap out of the Stag Lord, and converted Akiros Ismort into their Kingdom.

They decided on a Lawful Evil society, with a Sorcerer being Baroness of the Kingdom.

So far we've had one random event of note. We got the Sensational Crime, and the PC's decided to roleplay it out on their own. The Warden (Neutral Evil Half Orc Witch), and Spymaster (Neutral Evil Goblin Rogue) investigated a grissly murder and eventually tracked it back to a Red Mantis Assassin.

Best part about the whole thing was their reaction when they met her. The witch basically told her he could care less about the guy who died, but would prefer a heads up next time the Mantis's are in town so he's not chasing his tail.

The assassin was grateful and I might have the Mantis's set up a base of operations in the PC's first city and have it add some sort of bonus to the Kingdom.

And Sol, I will check out that thread. A link would be awesome if you don't mind.

GM_Solspiral wrote:

I'd want backgrounds, did something make each PC evil? Might there be hope for redemption for some, if so does this create an inter-party conflict.

There's potential here, especially if you can make the normal bad guys somehow more compelling (if you go deep into the archives on this board there's a fantastic bit giving the backgrounds of the stag lord and his minions more depth and even if you don't use it its a fantastic read. For some reason I'm thinking it was Rogue Eldion's work- his guides are pretty sweet too.)

Backgrounds are rare when it comes to my PC's, mainly because we run status quo, deadly games. In another game, we're running Rise of Runelords and there have been 2 PC deaths just in the first module.

My PC's generally tell where they're from, goals and some background information if its relevant to feats, traits and such. If I decide to play with backgrounds, like siblings, parents and such, my PC's usually let me make stuff up to make it more interesting (Holy Crap, I have a sister! type of stuff).

As far as villians more compelling, that's something we're noticing in Rise of the Runelords, there is some hilarious information about how the goblins interact with things, but you never really find out.

I plan on using the random events from the Kingdom building portion be more specific towards Nyrissa. If an assassin shows up, its one of hers, a fey folk. Crop Disaster? Fey folk sabotoage. Maurading Monster? Fey folk tame beasty. Making her a pain in the sides of PC's.

We'll see how tomorrow goes.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just to give everyone an update on this.

I've run two sessions with the evil group. It hasn't been half-bad so far. No real issues. The party rogue is sleight of handing some treasure here and there, but nothing major.

I changed a few things. For starters, I killed off Pervilash and Tyg. They were killed by two Dark Stalkers, who the party has cordial relations with (I added them for the Kingdom Building portions).

They've decided on a Lawful Evil society.

I've decided to turn this game away from just being about evil. I really want it to be about consequences for the PC's. Cause and effect. I'll let them do what they want, but I will try and decide what actions will happen, if any, based on their decisions.

1 to 50 of 93 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>